How has the overall approach to our Rule changed during the last century?

Editor: This is the fourth in a series of articles based on the eight La Salette Dossiers (from February 1978 to November 1981) totaling 718 pages in this study. In 1982, Fr. Eugene Barrette, M.S., the prime mover in this historic study, was elected the thirteenth La Salette Superior General (1982-1988). Other articles on Religious Life are available in our La Salette Online Library.

The “Great Rules” of the first 1,200 years

(from left) Writers of the “Great Rules”: Saints Augustine, Basil, Benedict, and FrancisThe type of juridical legislation for religious life that most of us are familiar with did not appear until the beginning of the 20th century. Before that time the Church had very little in terms of general legislation for religious. In 1215 the Fourth Lateran Council helped promote the four "great Rules" when it decreed that no new religious orders could be founded and also insisted that anyone wishing to found a new monastery must accept one of the already approved Rules, meaning the Rule of Augustine of Hippo (354-430), Basil of Caesarea (330-379), Benedict of Nursia (480-547) or Francis of Assisi (1181-1226). These rules are general enough that many rather diversified groups have been able to draw inspiration from them. Yet the drawback has been that they did tie religious life to monastic or mendicant models.

The Rule of the Society of Jesus and those following...

It was more than three centuries after the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) when the Church approved the Constitutions for the Society of Jesus and thus opened doors for the development of apostolic, religious congregations. Other religious congregations freely adopted these basic Rules or Constitutions. In general the particular law of the Congregations or Orders was the one governing the members, with little general Church law involved. (Exception must be observed here, however, concerning common Church law for women Congregations. This common law, with the insistence on Cloister and other monastic structures, actually Impeded the development of women apostolic Institutes.)

These early Rules and Constitutions maintained a certain flavor because they wove their inspirational texts in with their structural norms. They kept the focus on the essentials – the ultimate end of union with God and service in charity – by citing scripture or passages from the founder. The text of the Rule was at times the exhortations of the founder or foundress. Vision and spirit were wedded to structure in the text.

Tension arose between the initial approach to Religious Life and that of the early 1900s

Early depiction of Assumption of Our Lady on the Holy Mountain of La SaletteAfter the promotion of the new law-centered norms of Religious Life in 1901 and after the promotion of the new Code of Canon law in 1917, the earlier Rules and Constitutions of Saints Augustine, Basil, Benedict and Frances of Assisi maintained a certain flavor because they wove their inspirational texts in with their structural norms. The older Rules kept the focus on the essentials – the ultimate end of union with God and service in charity – by citing scripture or passages from the founder. The text of the Rule was at times the exhortations of the founder or foundress. Vision and spirit were wedded to structure in the text.

A new law-centered attitude toward the Rules of Religious appeared in 1901

In 1901 the Congregation for Bishops and Regulars (the Congregation for Religious was not created until 1908) issued guidelines for Constitutions and the Norms for the Rules of religious. These norms expressly prohibited all scriptural references, citations from the founder and theological affirmations or spiritual maxims. True this

the Code’s prohibition was practically abolished in the new Norms issued in 1921, but by then most of the Constitutions had been given their final form.

It is not too difficult to see how such a prohibition would greatly reduce the "soul" of a Congregation from appearing in the Constitutions. The promulgation of the Code of Canon Law in 1917 further contributed to this process of reducing Constitutions to a collection of the general legislation governing religious life. The tenor of the Code, because of its very nature, was predominantly juridical. Constitutions reflected the same tone and lost a great deal of their inspirational quality.

We almost lost the “soul” of the Rules of Religious

This is not to ignore the good effects from the Norms and Code. They did bring order and clarification where there had been obscurity and confusion; they also clarified the rights and duties of individuals, of those entering a congregation as well as those exercising authority. But because of the abundance of juridical details there are many who feel that the Constitutions that emerged somehow did not adequately express the "soul" of religious life or of a particular Congregation.

This is not to say the "soul" was absent, it is just that it was more easily lost in the welter of details. Extensive prescriptions also contributed to an eventual deterioration into a formation that risked sapping consecrated life of its capacity to transmit clearly to a new generation the essential values underlying alI the structures and exercises.

From 1901 to 1962— a “uniform” Rule, primarily viewed as legislation

Our community has constantly revised our Rule over the years. However, in 1901 the Congregation for Bishops and Regulars (later to become the Congregation for Religious in 1908) issued guidelines for all religious Rules. These norms expressly prohibited all scriptural references, citations from the founder, and theological affirmations or spiritual maxims.

Truly this prohibition was practically abolished in the new Norms issued in 1921, but by then most of the Constitutions had been given their final form. The tenor of the Code of Canon Law, because of its very nature, was predominantly juridical. Rules therefore reflected the same tone and lost a great deal of their inspirational quality. The Church’s approbation will then be an authenticating of this wondrous variety.

From 1965 to today— a “unique” Rule, viewed as a Book of Life

La Salette Rule in three different languagesWith the onset of Vatican II (1962-1965), the Church is once again emphasized that variety is a gift of the Holy Spirit and a manifestation of the charismatic nature of the Church. In order to try to preserve and promote this variety among Religious Congregations, the Church is now asking that our La Salette Rule be proper to our own community.

Within this context our Rule has once again become what it was originally intended to be — the expression of the unique charism that our community continues to make present in the Church. It contains the means that will guarantee that our La Salette lifestyle and ministry will incarnate, support and foster our charism of reconciliation. In Juridical terms, our community's special Rule will express the mind of the Founder (or founding event) in determining the nature, purpose, and distinctive character of our community, as well as its sound traditions. Our Rule can therefore be our own "Book of Life," containing the essentials that are common to religious life in general, but also and especially, the elements that retain the uniqueness of our particular community!

And finally...

Hopefully the above information can help us understand that the juridical form of Constitutions which most of us have been familiar with was a development of recent times. In the Second Vatican Council's call for revision, we discover the Church’s awareness that this direction, which was perhaps necessary and beneficial at the time, may have deteriorated over the years.

For many, Constitutions began to be looked upon more as shackles and restrictive chains rather than as a suitable means for the promotion of consecrated life in spirit rather than just in formal observance of innumerable detailed prescriptions. The stress on the "soul" is on attempt to regain a healthy perspective.(8)

Reflection Questions:

•  What in our Rule “preserves,” “reminds” or “confronts” you?
• Other comments…

Endnote: (1) La Salette Dossier #1, February 1978, pg. 21-24.