Anticipating the Order of the Present Moment

Accessibility, Approval, and Authenticity

The stairway to heaven is accessible to both dockers and floaters. While it may seem dockers would gravitate more to the traditional religious orders and various Church-approved groups, the Order of the Present Moment may provide for  floaters who need this option, but appropriate to dockers, also.

The order of the present moment could be formed and constructed so as to work through the ecclesial approval process as institute, movement, or order (since a vow is involved here). But surely we realize now that this is not so much a religious order as a spiritual order. There is certainly nothing about the OPM that could not be church approved.

Temporal approval, while very necessary for temporal orders and groups—and for valid, crucial reasons left to canon lawyers and clerics to explain—is not essential for the Order of the Present Moment. This order does necessitate approval, but in a spiritual sense, as it is spiritual, it encompasses the temporal in that Christ is the Head and we are the Body.  We know in Scripture, Christ is wed to His Church. She is His. 

The temporal and spiritual must unite in all, but the approval for a spiritual order cannot equate with temporal regulations necessary for the traditional religious orders, even though we are all temporal as well as spiritual. Traditional orders share spiritual elements, obviously. Some aspects of those in the OPM may require temporal approval. We will deal with that in that moment, temporally. 

Now we examine  temporal components of  religious orders and how they integrate in a spiritual order, but first, some thoughts on authenticity. People tend to be influenced by that which is approved, assuming it then is authentic.

Consider a traditional religious order of our time period, for example, an order formed in imitating St. Francis' life, to live like the poor and serve the poor. We might think dressing in rough woolen, hooded, brown robes, sandals or barefoot, ridding modern conveniences (beds, table, dishwasher, microwave, refrigerator, carpeting, cars, bikes, gainful employment) makes us as St. Francis and the  poor. 

We may genuinely aim to be like St. Francis, want to be in solidarity with, somehow to relate and help the poor. Spiritually we may be trying to directly focus on religious life via corporal and spiritual works of mercy: prayer, reading, liturgy, charity.  We may want to be to others a visual reminder of St. Francis and his saintly existence, for in his century he was in solidarity with the poor. A question: Can one authentically be in one century and culture, and yet authentically be as someone of another time and place?

In the 13^th century the poor wore dark-colored, rough tunics (don't show soil and not costly). The poor went barefoot and were fortunate if had sandals. They could not afford to wear their hair in the styles of the wealthy, nor did they own horses and carriages. The poor in St. Francis' time slept on the ground, did not have cooking conveniences of the rich (which to us would still be primitive), begged food scraps, and some existed on bread and water. Medical help for the poor of St. Francis' time consisted of whatever their poor comrades could provide through herbal remedies, or no help at all.

The wealthy in St. Francis' time wore robes, but of dyed, finer fabrics, and stockings, shoes, cloaks and hats. The men grew beards and long hair, kept trimmed; the women wore long hair fashioned under lovely headpieces and veils. Actually, other than the differences in fabrics and accessories, the clothing of rich and poor was not different in basic design. 

Homes of the materially fortunate were heated by fireplaces, cooking done over the fire or in modified stoves, dishes wood, pottery or pewter, and mattresses filled with feathers or for less wealthy, straw. The poor who were not servants of the wealthy often lived without shelter, or had lean-to's, or hovered in abandoned nature's nooks and crannies. They cooked what little they hunted or scrounged, over an open fire (for those who could find wood) and warmed themselves as best they could. The poor had little to no means of education. The profile could continue. We see an image of St. Francis' era.

We do well to ask ourselves: Is it possible to have solidarity with the poor of our time period by living as St. Francis did, in identifying with the poor of his time period? And by that endeavor, would we then in our time find the stairway to heaven that St. Francis discovered and climbed to holiness? Is such a way of life in our 21^st century going to accomplish these goals, and are they authentic? Consider further, is it even possible for us in the 21^st century, born in this country, educated, employable, and possessing, say, low to average conveniences—to truly experience being one with the poor?

What if we dress as the poor of our time, in jeans, tees, sweats, scruffy tennis shoes, thrift shop coats, a backpack for our earthly possessions which might include a bottle of wine or street drugs, our hair at whatever length from whatever last haircut and shave? We might be given a bike, or ride the buses and subways, begging tickets or given stubs from social welfare agencies. 

We could live in homeless shelters, halfway houses, or sleep on the streets. We could eat at soup kitchens or get sacks of groceries from church food pantries, and line up for medical help at inner city clinics or utilize the hospital emergency rooms, on payment plan or gratis. Yet with all the externals in place, are we truly in solidarity with the poor? Are we authentically the poor?

Or are we always authentically meant to be what God created us to be, in whatever culture, socio-economic status, demographic, and geographic region? Perhaps by our birth and upbringing, environment, personalities and temperaments--in actuality having lived something other than life of the authentically poor--we will never authentically be in solidarity with the poor. 

The same could be premised of the poor being authentically in solidarity with the wealthy. What if a poor person wins 16 million dollars in the lottery? The various factors beyond externals cannot be displaced or discounted. However, we can agree that we can be in empathy with others, poor, rich, in- between; educated, uneducated; intelligent or not. We can help one another, but we must be honest in that we cannot become the other, not authentically, no matter what we discard of possessions, no matter what we wear.

Perhaps the best we can hope for is authentic compassion, understanding, empathy, caring, giving, and accepting. And that is nothing to discount. But maybe the authentic approach to helping the poor or seeking, finding, and climbing the stairway to heaven is by being who we are in our own time period, where and how God placed us in whatever socio-economic status, race, culture, training, knowledge, physical attributes, moral, mental and spiritual development, and with whatever accompanying material circumstances. 

Whether or not the Order of the Present Moment is an authentic approach, solution, or option remains to be considered, developed, implemented over time, case studies and results observed, analyzed, and conclusions drawn. Part of the process in the OPM includes on-going review and revision. Hopefully this will eliminate the seeming cyclical trend in many traditional religious orders of: founding, growth, success, plateau, decline, demise or reform.