1) The situation of not few religious men today: vote of poverty or of a good middle-class? To talk about poverty is a fashion or a need?

It is a fact that has always affected me watching the Church’s history: the appreciation of poverty and the poor has been the most accurate thermometer to measure the honesty and profoundness of its reforms, besides the documents and the nice words, always abundant. 

And the same has happened in the history of Consecrated Life. It is a fact that the Evangelical Council that is at the origin of many foundations, reforms and collapses, has not been celibacy or obedience to a superior, but external poverty: from shod they have become discalced, some have dedicated to the poor, others to the poorest among the poor… And today, in which Constitution reformed after Vatican II it is not said that those religious people want to dedicate themselves “particularly” to the poor? It is also meaningful that in the exhortation “Consecrated Life” is talked about: the evangelical councils in general 38 times, the whole virginal – cast - celibate 49 times, obedient-obedience 41 times, and the poor-poverty 76 times! (We should note, by the way, that there is consequently no obsession at all about the sexual issue, but the poverty one!). All this means that even in CL today the actual thermometer of the authenticity of life, in what respects to evangelical councils, besides the discussions about obedience and the difficulties in the affective-sexual field, keeps being (as always) the understanding and the experiencing of poverty.  

In effect, contradictions are not few. I would like to quote some examples. More than once, it happens, even today, what Bours-Kamphaus say, quoting the “Dairy” of Sören Kierkegaard (l8l3-l855):

“Into the magnificent church of the castle comes a state predicator of Court, chosen by a learned audience, he introduces himself in front of an elite group of notable and learned people and preaches touched about the apostle’s words: God has chosen the small ones and the rejected ones. And no one laughs”.

How many vehement discussions there have been during this year:

“… about the Church of the poor (…), seated on comfortable arm-chairs having in front a small glass of premium quality. And no who laughed. All were taking the matter seriously and were convinced of saying important things for the Church’s renewal. And instead, it was needed to laugh, to cry, to embarrass…”¹.

F. Radcliffe used to write when he was General Master of the Dominicans:

“Once, in an American Province (Dominican), after a week of debates about poverty, the meeting closed with a dinner in a fancy restaurant. At the end, one of the friars said: «Well, if this is the way to finish the discussion on poverty, what are we going to pretend to do next year after having talked about chastity?»” ².

In turn, the well-known Capuchin F. Cantalamessa confessed that, after having written two booklets about obedience and virginity, he could not make up his mind to publish another one about poverty. And the reason we was giving was: 

“With what courage can we talk about poverty, when what among us would be considered today as almost heroic poverty, to millions of human beings is a normal fact of every day life and of all their lives, when it is not even a luxury? To fast in life with “bread and water” would be for us the maximum austerity, whereas to millions of people to know that they will have “bread and water” would already be a kind of dream” ³.

How could it be called “poor” in our society a religious person who has a house, food, work, study and also the possibility (many call it a “right”!) of enjoying a period of holidays annually or a sabbatical period (perhaps of a year!), being sure that at his/her return, he/she will find all what he/she left when he/she departed? Is it that sometimes we have lost even the capacity of being ashamed of our claims of small (or big) bourgeoisies?

            In fact, points out Martínez, in the RL the institution offers to its professed people an adaptation without particular traumas, a “light” solution. They are ensured, with words and acts, a total assistance to their basic needs, namely their biological needs, vital for the survival and the necessary biophysical well-being. Hardly is there among us that one who has serious reasons of complaints with respect to food, rest, personal belongings, use of community objects… In general, we have a life style that could be placed between the middle and the upper class of the “first world”, with an exception – he says, we work less than the average people among us, who need to earn their means of living. In any case, our expectations are in this field those of disposing of more money, more time, developing things with less effort, having more objects and hobbies. The community furnishes with our sustenance, offers us an occupation, company and cohabitation, they support us in the difficult moments, personal and familiar ones, they guarantee us the future. Is, in a word, the “great mother” that takes care generously and solicitously of the needs of its sons and daughters. In exchange of all this, the religious man or woman is asked to be faithful to his/her commitment, which means living in community, being what we call a “good religious man or woman” who complies with his/her duties and does what is required to be done. An attitude consequently dependent on order and discipline, on an adequate development of one’s own tasks, without big pretensions, in a continuity that safeguards the principles, the norms and the works of the institution. In this way, will see fulfilled its needs of esteem, relationship and security⁴.

            Perhaps, not all what Martínez says can be generalized; but it makes us think, since surely there is some true in it. In the West, actually, we have generally done many speeches, published volumes more or less interesting about poverty, but we have remained in the words. On the other hand, often, religious people from the Third World come to the West (to Rome, for instance) to talk to us about poverty of their co-citizens and about the urgency of getting involved in that reality; but, often – I say – their words have left the listeners somewhat puzzled or skeptic seeing the type of personal life, the ostentation with which they were adorned, or the tourist tours they made before arriving to see us, and/or those that they were promising to do before coming back to their poor people… And how many times, religious people from here and there, have talked less and have simply gone to live among the poor, to give them a hand with their lives more than with their words! As somebody has said, it would be necessary to apply to many of us today the words of the Bible: “You shall not take the name of the poor in vain” (cf. Ex 20,7).