by Hildegard Pleva
Contributor
January 30 marked the 100th anniversary of the birth of Thomas Merton, known simply as Father Louis to his brother Trappists, but to the world as a young intellectual who heard the voice of God and followed it into cloistered monastic life. His memoir The Seven Storey Mountain, published in 1948, became a best seller. A spiritual “shot heard round the world,” it is a conversion story still resonating with seekers in our fast-paced age. By this and numerous other works Merton fathered the contemplative living and prayer movements of our time.
As a contemplative nun whose life is ordered to silence and recollection, to the art of the long, loving look at the real, I am constantly reminded of the purpose of my vocation and encouraged by Thomas Merton. But I am also inspired and validated in my path by the appropriation and expression of these values which I observe among apostolic religious.
Movement into the contemplative way, into a deeper place, a mystical place, the locus of mystery, is manifesting itself in patterns of being in organizational structures. Most notably, it is reflected by the organizational bodies and principles created for self-governance by congregations of women religious. Perhaps it is this deliberate choice of a contemplative foundation for all decision-making that baffles members of culturally and politically entrenched hierarchical systems in which leading from a position of power is the premier principle.
The very theme of the 2014 meeting of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, “Holy Mystery Revealed in Our Midst,” spoke to the difficult reality of finding ourselves or our organization between a rock and a hard place; a “middle space,” as described by Nancy Schreck, OSF, at the conference. This is difficult territory for the members of LCWR; its terrain marked by diminishment in numbers, ministerial losses and stiff challenges from without.
The legislative branch of our government too finds itself in a “middle space,” although it may not be recognized. This middle space is created by the nation’s diminishing economic prowess, shifts in the balance of power among leading nations, and the persistence of social and economic inequities within. “Middle space” is an insecure space; a space which can breed fear and its natural consequence, which is paralysis.
LCWR has chosen to deal with the threat of paralysis by moving out from a contemplative core into contemplative dialogue. They recognize that the harsh realities of “middle space” necessitate systemic change. Yet the very prospect of change generates fear and unproductive controversy. “It exposes the insufficiency of our frameworks of understanding and calls for more listening, more hearing of words within words, a greater openness to testimony.” (Nancy Schreck)
The Centre for Contemplative Dialogue is a non-profit, non-faith based organization, promoting this approach in business, educational and religious sectors. The centre offers this working definition on its website:
. . . ‘Dialogue’ is ‘the practice of building shared meaning.’ It imagines that our inability to get on the same page prevents us from solving problems we care about. It recognizes that often, our disagreements aren’t even about the real concerns or positions we hold, but some caricature or stereotype we hold about ‘the other side.’ Dialogue helps us get past that. It doesn’t mean we wind up agreeing. But at least we’ll know what our real differences are, and maybe what real possibilities exist to work together better. It’s not consensus. It doesn’t water down differences. At the end of the day I am still free to make my best choices. But if dialogue is done well, I’ll likely be in a better spot to know what those best choices might be.
This framework for decision making was adopted by my community many years ago. It is natural for us as contemplatives to give the process more time, to pray silently as a gathered community in chapel for 15 minutes before community meetings, to adopt the stance of genuine listening. We seek the guidance of professional facilitators who encourage contemplative process, protect each participant’s right to speak and be heard, and build in time for silent deliberation and invocation of the Spirit of God.
Another organization with which I am a member has also incorporated these principles. The Association of Contemplative Sisters was formed in 1969 by nuns in the United States seeking mutual support in the process of community renewal called for by the Second Vatican Council. Today most of the members are lay women pursuing the contemplative way. As one of the small number of vowed religious who continue to participate, I have observed their adoption of a contemplative process for selection of leadership. The process includes more time for speaking and listening to those nominated, time for private prayer and consideration of options by voters and nominees, and freedom to withdraw from candidacy – all within a context of prayer and mutual respect and assessment of the collective wisdom of the group.
Chapter of the Grey Nuns of the Sacred Heart expressed the hope that their commitment to applying the principles of contemplative dialogue in their deliberations would increase mutual understanding, improve the quality of Congregational relationships and “cultivate relational integrity in all our interactions.” The definition of contemplative dialogue presented here and the hopes expressed in the Grey Nuns’ document indicate the possibility for a healthier and more productive mode of operation for our church and the legislative branch of our government.
And what of the individual disposition to this process? Are there interior attitudes that can either sabotage or enhance the likelihood of success for such a project? In her article, “Moving into a Deeper Communion: Communal Discernment through Contemplative Dialogue” (LCWR Occasional Papers, Summer 2014), Liz Sweeney, SSJ, offers some fine reading for those who would attempt the inclusive process of silence, speaking, listening, more silence, discerning, testing and confirming. There are also warnings about internal disposition taken from C. Otto Scharmer (Theory U: Leading from the Future as It Emerges, 2009). “. . . Be aware of the interior voices of judgment, cynicism and fear that can prevent true discernment and creativity because they block our open mind, open heart, and open will.”
During a discussion at the LCWR conference one of the panelists, Nancy Conway, CSJ, offered that her experience in leadership had brought her to the counterintuitive learning to abandon the effort to lead from a position of competence. The stance to be cultivated is that of humble openness to new understandings and the competencies of others. This suggests a very difficult and task for leaders, legislators, captains of business and members of the hierarchy of the church. It means putting aside the firm conviction that, “I know what is best and I know what our conclusion should be.”
And when the dialogue is over and decisions or directions determined, the last requirement to be fulfilled is that of letting go. It is the contemplation-based interior movement to acceptance. It emerges from trust in the work and discernment of individuals who made every effort to hear each other, to approach the question at hand with an open mind, to examine options together, to include time for silence allowing for reflection in favor of consensus building. Acceptance emerges from believing that everyone did the best that she could with the knowledge, skills and judgment at hand. Letting go means allowing for acknowledgement that a decision may not ultimately turn out to have been the best one. But it also means believing that the future may confirm a decision the most enlightened and effective. The greatest consolation is that possible gridlock and its disastrous consequences were avoided and something was done to meet the requirements of the day, the challenges of our times.
[After raising three sons and enjoying her profession as a school librarian, Hildegard became a contemplative Redemptoristine nun in 2000. Her community shares a monastery with Carmelite nuns in Beacon, New York. Her writings have been published in Review for Religious, Cistercian Studies Quarterly and the journal of her international order, the Order of the Most Holy Redeemer (OSsR). She blogs at Contemplative Horizon.]