Before I begin to describe a terrible indictment of the Catholic laity, I refer to the Rule of St. Benedict. And, before I refer to the Rule, I want to quote two people who told me that it is the duty of monasteries to take in indigents. No, it is not. We are in the age of the laity, and it is our duty.
First, here is St. Benedict:
Let all guests who arrive be received like Christ,
for He is going to say,
"I came as a guest, and you received Me" (Matt. 25:35).
And to all let due honor be shown,
especially to the domestics of the faith and to pilgrims.
As soon as a guest is announced, therefore,
let the Superior or the brethren meet him
with all charitable service.
And first of all let them pray together,
and then exchange the kiss of peace.
For the kiss of peace should not be offered
until after the prayers have been said,
on account of the devil's deceptions.
In the salutation of all guests, whether arriving or departing,
let all humility be shown.
Let the head be bowed
or the whole body prostrated on the ground
in adoration of Christ, who indeed is received in their persons.
After the guests have been received and taken to prayer,
let the Superior or someone appointed by him sit with them.
Let the divine law be read before the guest for his edification,
and then let all kindness be shown him.
The Superior shall break his fast for the sake of a guest,
unless it happens to be a principal fast day
which may not be violated.
The brethren, however, shall observe the customary fasts.
Let the Abbot give the guests water for their hands;
and let both Abbot and community wash the feet of all guests.
After the washing of the feet let them say this verse:
"We have received Your mercy, O God,
in the midst of Your temple" (Ps.47[48]:10).
In the reception of the poor and of pilgrims
the greatest care and solicitude should be shown,
because it is especially in them that Christ is received;
for as far as the rich are concerned,
the very fear which they inspire
wins respect for them.
Moving on from here to my main point proves a painful journey, not in the telling of a tale, but in the condemnation of a lifestyle which has marginalized the poor and suffering. The lifestyle has a name-the American Dream-and it has showed itself to be a nightmare.
A while ago, I was temporarily staying in a house and I was ill. The Catholic woman who was talking to me about staying there said to me that I was "an intruder". Now, I did not take this personally, as I realized that there must be something in her philosophy which saw people needing help, even for a week, as not the norm for her way of living. She saw anyone coming into her house for any length of time (a week, for example) as an intruder.
Now, I found this curious, as when I had my own house, I had an open door policy. Frequently, my son was chucked out of his bed to sleep upstairs in the attic, so that a guest could use his bed. Son loved being upstairs, and all guests just became part of the family. My favorite guests were two people who just put their toothbrush in the family holder, which indicated that they felt right at home-which is the point of hospitality.
Now, being called an intruder made me ponder why this person, otherwise an upstanding and popular Catholic woman in her church, who is known for charitable works, would use this term.
Being of a completely different mindset, and having experienced love and care from others in my consistent indigent life elsewhere, I was, honestly, baffled. I even talked to a dear friend of mine who said she has met other people in the Midwest who consider guests or those in need as intruders.
Interesting.
So, I formulated some reasons why an American Catholic would believe that firstly, she had no duty to help a homeless person, and two, why that person would be deemed an intruder.
By the way, I am related to this person.
First of all, coming from my perspective, I never considered my home as "mine". My house was God's house, as He had given me the means to have a house. I never took a house for granted, and I was happy to have one.
Second, "mi casa es su casa" was my motto. Now, in America, extended families simply do not live together outside the Latino cultures. All my cousins live miles away and have never had extended family live with them. Even though some still live in houses with five bedrooms and the kids are long gone, this idea of having an family member join them in their house is foreign. How did this mindset become the norm?
I think this mindset was purposefully pushed by the American government even as early as the First World War, to break up extended families. Perhaps Americans can no longer love the other.
Third, I have heard mothers and fathers of a certain age state that they would not want their children moving close to them. The Amish in my area build houses for the newly married across the street or as close as possible, maintaining relationships with their grown children and grandchildren. How did Americans outside these communities move away from wanting to be close to family members? How did parents come not to want their children close by?
Fourth, an "intruder" is an outsider. one who comes in without permission and without welcome, like a thief. An intruder is one who is unpleasant and rude. Long ago, I had an intruder come into a townhouse where I was living. I had to deal with this man. He had evil intentions. He was a true intruder.
But, a person in need, who is related can hardly be a real intruder. So, what did my Catholic relative think about opening her house to a temporary guest?
First of all, she obviously thinks her house is hers and not God's . She has no idea of "my house being your house". She must feel threatened by anyone coming in.
Second, to enlarge on that last sentence, if a person feels threatened by someone coming into their house for any length of time, that threat must be connected to either some sort of insecurity or hurt, or is simply a revelation of a long life of selfishness. Could it be that one is hiding sin from the world and to open one's house simply causes fear of disclosure? I merely reflect.
Third, now I am a real introvert. As an INTJ, I clock far on the side of introverts, and love my solitude and scheduling. I love long hours of silence. I never use a radio or have music or TV in the background. However, people who came into my house did not threaten my space. Curious. Perhaps because my space is internalized and not externalized, this space "walks around with me". Is it possible that many American Catholics have not internalized "space"-that little cell where we find God? Do they need ten or twelve rooms for "space"?
Now, the American Dream holds that one can be anything one wants to be and that one will have a house, a yard and chickens. One of the common things women tell me when I talk to them about community building is that they are for it, but their husbands do not want the reach out to others and do not want to deal with others outside the family, or even extended family members.
Again, does the American Dream either cause judgement or fear-a fear that "if one somewhat talented and intelligent person can end up on my sofa, I may be in position one day" and that would mean that the American Dream simply does not work? Not all people have a house, a yard and chickens.
Musing on this, I find that the Catholic rule of hospitality, which should be picked up by the laity in the Age of the Laity, is sadly missing in the Church. The evil of socialism has caused some to say, "Is there no government plan for this" or that? No. Many people live in areas where the government has no housing, and has run out of emergency aid. There are few monasteries and most, if not all, charge for guests.
The time for being open to those who have not will come upon us, and I am merely a forerunner.
Treat all guests as Christ....