THE RULE OF LIFE

• Introduction • Chapter I • Chapter II • Chapter III • Chapter IV •
• Chapter V • Chapter VI • Chapter VII • Chapter VIII • Chapter IX •

Introduction

The importance of the Rule of Life rests in the fact that, in it, Stanislaus Papczyński (1631-1701) presents the principal ideas and fundamental elements, which were to constitute the Institute he founded. It is also the principal source from which we can see the most important elements of his spiritual life at the time of its writing - elements decisive for the growth and maturation of his interior life from 1673 until his death.

We can only estimate when Stanislaus prepared the first draft of the Rule of Life. It was only after the time of his departure from the Piarists (December 11, 1670) that he proposed founding the Society of the Immaculate Conception; and after 1671 that he was able to formulate a distinct idea of that society. So it is likely that not until sometime during 1672 - while he stayed at the Karski court - was he able to formulate his idea in writing: the first draft of the Rule of Life.

If this is actually the fact, then it was during October 1672 that he showed it to Stanislaus Krajewski, the first candidate to his institute.

Changes in the Rule

It seems that this stable "law" of Stanislaus (which was not judged as "too rigid") was not followed at the Korabiew foundation. And so, a year later, Stanislaus was forced to "conform" his first formulation of the Rule of Life with the dispositions of Bishop Swiecicki for the Marian Hermits at Korabiew - a change that evidently gave the Rule an eremitical flavor.

Despite these changes, by 1677 (and the foundation of a Marian house at the Cenacle in New Jerusalem) only the Marians at Korabiew were obliged, in fact, to follow strict eremitical observance. By the time of its publication in 1687, Stanislaus had inserted into the Rule his permission for assisting in parishes (ch. 1, n. 3), as well as new papal statements on communal life (ch. 6, n.1) and particular directives for the Marians (ch. 7, n. 8). It is generally true that the Rule reflects only a little of the basic tendency of the Marians (in fact) toward an apostolic life outside the monasteries.

Why? It seems that it has something to do with the specific legal situation of the newborn Marian Institute: it was almost impossible to obtain apostolic approval. Therefore, the Marians were founded as hermits - a state already approved by the Church - as a legal expedient for establishing a new institute without papal approval, needing only the approval of the local bishop. In other words, in this way the Marians would be allowed to exist - in the status of hermits.

In the period 1687-1698, in defending the Marian community against the attacks of its opponents, it again became necessary to insist that the Marians were hermits, and, as such , did not need to rely on papal approval for their existence. Such was the scope of the argument contained in the "Informative Preface", which Stanislaus wrote in 1697 as he prepared the text of the Rule of Life - as corrected in 1694 by Cardinal Colloredo - for publication. In this translation only excerpts from the "Preface" are included; the more general legal considerations were omitted.

The 1698 edition is the final edition of the Rule of Life to appear during the lifetime of Stanislaus, and it is the text of that Latin edition, on which this translation is based.

Sources

In writing the "Informative Preface," Stanislaus used as sources various works of his contemporary canonist-theologians. For the text proper of the Rule of Life, he uses other sources, the Scriptures, and papal decree and constitutions. Twenty times he cites - quoting or paraphrasing - the Word of God, almost always from the New Testament, in explanation of the law and ascetical norms prescribed for the Marians. Thus, the Rule possesses a distinctly evangelical flavor.

Among the papal documents considered as sources for the Rule of Life - which were cited individually - were the decrees of Clement VIII "for the reform of religious": Nullus omnino, July 25, 1599; and his Constitution, Cum ad Regularum, March 13, 1603.

The rule of Life undoubtedly owes much to his Piarist Constitution, especially to the original text composed by St. Joseph Calasanz. It is relatively easy to uncover in the Rule some typically Piarist traits; but these qualities were adapted to the different nature of the Marian community. It should be noted as well, that certain Piarists ideas evident in the Rule in 1687 were later abandoned or changed.

Besides these three sources - Scripture, the documents of Clement VIII, and the Piarist Constitution - it is difficult to uncover the other sources. This is because, for a certain number of prescriptions - which concern all religious institutes - the Rule of Life simply relies on the Church's tradition.

Original Latin Text of the Rule of Life

Servi Dei Stanislai a Iesu Maria Papczyński: Positio, Rome, 1977, Congregation for the Causes of the Saints, Historical Office, p. 459ff.

Informative Preface [1]

1. This Congregation of the Immaculate Conception, about which we provide to you, most benevolent reader, this information, was canonically erected in the eremitical status[2] by the Bishop Stephan Wierzbowski, Ordinary of Poznan and elect Archbishop of Gniezno, who has laudably passed through this life. The Congregation was endowed with certain indulgences and a Confraternity by the Most Holy Father Pope Innocent XI of happy memory[3], and it was approved and assumed in perpetual protection by the most august and invincible Prince John III, most happily reigning King of Poland[4] together with the whole Polish Republic in the General Diet celebrated in Warsaw in 1677.[5]

2. [...] the life of Hermits ... is approved in the status of penitents [...]. Hence they do not need any approval, once they are admitted juridically and canonically by an Ordinary of the place. [...] The one who has embraced this [eremitical] status, especially in some Congregation of Hermits approved at least by a Bishop, and has made the profession [of the vows] in it, he may not change this status, unless he has been dispensed by the Roman Pontiff at the request of the Superior of the said Congregation on account of most just and grave reasons involving a harm of the third party. Such declaration was made by the Sacred Penitentiary in 1691, when it was consulted by a certain Supeior of this kind of Hermits.[6] Such Hermits, once they stay in small monasteries, are not included among those who are prohibited to receive new houses,[7] and those who live in a Congregation may have a way of life approved by a Bishop. [...] And nobody can doubt that the same may be ordained with the title of Poverty or Congregation (whichever is more favored in Rome).

3. These things have been prefaced briefly in order to inform those who feel and speak unfavorably about the present Institute, partly because of ignorance, partly due to bad information. If they will look with more kindly eye into the few chapters that follow, and which are proposed for observance to these Marian Hermits, certainly they will be more benevolent towards them, who seek or desire nothing else besides God and his glory, the honor of the Virgin, the salvation of souls and their own, assisting the dead. For the rest, although this Congregation is erected in the public status of Hermits, it does not insist so much on solitude as to consider unmeritorious for itself to sometimes engage also in spiritual services for the neighbors, - as far as it is lawful, - without doing harm to anybody else. Nor does it absolutely request the eremitical title in order to make itself equal to anybody. In truth, it is convinced that it should venerate each of the most holy, ancient and pious Orders and all Institutes to such an extent as to profess itself the last of all and recommend itself humbly to their protection and charity.

4. From all these things each one can conclude that his present Institute of Marians Hermits, founded in the status approved by the Canon Law, does not need any other approval.[8] For when the Sueprior General applied to the Holy Apostolic See for its confirmation,[9] the whole affair was first examined for almost a year by the Apostolic Nunciature in Poland. Then on the basis of its information the matter was also discussed for a longer time in Rome. Finally the answer came, through the aforesaid Cardinal,[10] that it is enough for the Institute to have the approval of the Ordinary of the place and this Rule of Life which has been studied by His Eminence with utmost assiduity and corrected with highest wisdom.[11] Such an answer is contained in the authentic letter of His Eminence directed to the Superior and his companions,[12] the letter with has been presented to and accepted by the present Bishop of Poznan.[13]

[1] This Preface was written by Bl. Stanislaus Papczyński probably in 1697, when the Marians were getting the Rule of Life ready for publication. In fact, on Feb. 20, 1698, they obtained the necessary imprimatur from Bishop Nic. Pop_awski, but the text was not printed, because after the death of Bishop Witwicki (March 4, 1908) the Marians decided to try once again to obtain Pontifical approval for their Institute (the present Norma Vitae would have had to be updated, if this effort were to meet with success).

[2] The date of the canonical erection: April 21, 1679. See the text of the document in Positio, pp. 392-400.

[3] The reference is made to the Breve Cum Sicut accepimus of March 20, 1681. This was the first Pontifical recognition of the Marians. In fact, it is difficult to see in the Breve of the indulgences the asserted concession of a Confraternity of the Marinas. It is true that the text contains the phrase: "Confraternity of the Faithful", but it seems that it crept into it only by inadvertance of the one who was writing the Breve. Nonetheless Bishop Wierzbowski (and the Marians) concluded from this prase that the Holy See permits establishment of a Confraternity. Accordingly, from that time on, the Marians started to erect the "Confraternity of the Immaculate Conception assisting the souls of the faithful departed" in their own churches; cf. below, chapter VII, n. 8. See the text of the Breve in Positio, pp. 404-409.

[4] Bl. Stanislaus speaks here about King John Sobieski (1674-1696).

[5] The document of the Approval is published in Positio, pp. 376-78.

[6] Most probably the Preface makes reference here to Fr. Stanislaus himself, who was in Rome in 1691. He wanted to obtain such a declaration from the Holy See, because he hoped that it would help to stop desertions of members from his Institute, who is increasing number were taking advantage of the opinion of some moralists according to whom any confessor could absolve a religious from simple vows. Cf. Positio, pp. 514-15.

[7] Maybe because of the contrary opinion the Marians were notable to accept some foundations offered to them; cf. Position, p. 531-32.

[8] This fact is stressed by Fr. Stanislaus, because some people claimed that the Marians, without a Pontifical approval, had no right to exist as a religious Institute.

[9] Fr. Stanislaus made a double petition in this sence in 1692; cf. Positio, pp. 515-519.

[10] He speaks here about Cardinal Leander Colloredo, whose name figures on the front-page of the Rule of Life.

[11] It is impossible for us to know the extent of the corrections made in the Rule of Life by Cardinal Colloredo, because we do not know if the text presented by Fr. Stanislaus for approval was exactly that of 1687. Hence it is possible that Fr. Stanislaus himself is responsible for some differences between the Norma Vitae of 1687 and that of 1694.

[12] This letter is no longer available to us, not even in a copy.

[13] He speaks here about Bishop John Stanislaus Witwicki, Ordinary of Poznan (1687-1698).