LEADERSH LEADERSHIP IP SESSIO SESSION FO N FOR T R THE RI HE - - PDF document

Anne Josephine Carr, rgs 1

LEADERSH LEADERSHIP IP SESSIO SESSION FO N FOR T R THE RI HE RIMOA REG REGIO ION Augus ugust 20 t 2016 Presen esenta tatio tions b by y Anne J Josephin

• sephine Ca

e Carr, r , rgs gs SESSION THREE – Part I Sisters, yesterday we looked at leadership in general and what it means to us and especially in

• Africa. We looked at the qualities needed in a leader and we saw how we have to grow into

leadership and how Mary Euphrasia did this. We looked at what kind of leader she was and we saw that leadership is often a thankless task! Today we are going to look again at leadership but from a different perspective, we are going to look at how she worked with lay partners of her day and her leadership in reconciliation and forgiveness. Through all the examples you will see just how dynamic she was. Now, if we take her work with lay partners, we have to say that none of the houses she founded would have survived without the help and support of lay men and women both financially and materially and spiritually. Mary Euphrasia was a Sister of Our Lady of

• Charity. She was used to working with the laity. It has been so since the beginning when

John Eudes turned to the laity at the beginning of the Order. So we must take it as normal for lay people to be involved in the mission. But first of all, I want to return to the style of leadership she had because from this all the rest

• flowed. We used to talk about a feminine model of leadership – perhaps you are too young to

have heard it spoken about, but it was about women leaders who created strong relationships which allowed impossible things to happen. Mary Euphrasia was that type of leader. She had wonderful relationships with the sisters and with the laity and this is how she managed to do what she did. One sister who did not belong to the Congregation testified at the Process of Canonisation: “She possessed her sister’ hearts. That was the secret of her success.” And I asked you yesterday: do you possess your sisters’ hearts? For instance: when I think of the sisters, names like Sr. Mary of St. Joseph Regaudiat, Sr. Mary of St. John of the Cross David, Sr. Mary of St. Therese de Couëspel, Sr. Mary de Chantal Cesbron de la Roche spring to mind. Mary Joseph Regaudiat, foundress of the congregation in Britain; a sister who had been sent to found a house in Bordeaux and took the first opportunity that presented itself to run back to Angers – why, because life was too difficult and she had a dependant relationship on St. Mary Euphrasia. She learned from this experience and later went to London. Mary John of the Cross, she opened a boarding school and asked Mary Euphrasia for sisters to staff it. Mary Euphrasia’s reply was that the opening

• f the boarding school was, and I quote, the misfortune of the Institute. She said she would

never work in it nor would she ask other to do so. She learned from this experience and went

• n to become the founder of the congregation in Germany and first Provincial; Mary Therese

de Couëspel, a widow who was used to travelling all over with her soldier husband and who

Anne Josephine Carr, rgs 2

became the confidant and the trouble shooter. She was banished from the Diocese of Angers by Mgr. Angebault because he felt she had been disrespectful to him. Mary Chantal Cesbron de la Roche, another widow with a very good social standing in Angers which allowed her to be the correspondant for the Generalate with Rome. Then there were Sr. Mary of St. Marine Verger, Sr. Mary of St. Peter de Coudenhove, the second and third Generals both of whom knew Mary Euphrasia well, particularly Mother Marine Verger. These women, each of them, had a relationship with Mary Euphrasia. Each of them learned to be leaders at her school, through her example. None of this would have been possible if Mary Euphrasia had not profoundly understood what it means to be Christian – a follower of Christ. We are told that the making of Final Vows brings us the fullness of the Christian vocation. Perfectae Caritatis of Vatican II tells us: “The purpose of the religious life is to help the members follow Christ and be united to God through the profession of the evangelical counsels… This constitutes a special consecration, which is deeply rooted in that of baptism and expresses it more fully.” If you think back to your catechism and the question: What does Baptism do for us? The answer or part of it was/is Baptism makes us Christians, members of the Church and followers of Jesus Christ. Christianity is not an assent to a body of dogmas, or not primarily. Christianity is a

• relationship. Pope Francis writes in his Apostolic Exhortion Amoris Laetitia “Christ

proposed as the distinctive sign of his disciples the law of love and the gift of self for others. Love bears fruit in mercy and forgiveness.” N°27 This actually just about sums up what we are about. A love for others and each other that bears fruit in mercy and forgiveness. You ask what life skills St. Mary Euphrasia used to bring about forgiveness and

• reconciliation. Beware of putting modern words and concepts into Mary Euphrasia’s mouth.

She would not have been aware of using life skills as we use the phrase today. Psychology and Sociology were not sciences in her day and if we could ask her about how she practised Carl Rogers theory of UPR she would probably say: what are you talking about? If we explained that is was treating people with an unconditional positive regard she might say: But we do that as though it were the most obvious thing in the world to do. And for her, it was. It was what the Good Shepherd did/does. And you remember she said that we would not have the spirit of our vocation unless we had the thoughts, sentiments, attitudes of the Good Shepherd himself. Her concern was to form women who could live their consecration and work in the apostolates of the congregation. She would not have consciously thought about holistic formation, formation for leadership as we talk today although she knew that formation for the life and leadership required the whole person to be engaged. How did she do it? Well, of course there was her character – she was outgoing, kind, vigilant, but most of all she lived the life she was asking/expecting others to live. There were no privileges for this leader. It is said that the sisters despaired of getting her old worn clothes from her to replace them with something respectable. She would not accept the first serving of meat at meal times – this was usually reserved for the Superior. In Mary Euphrasia’s day this portion went to the front door for the first poor person who came to ask for food.

Anne Josephine Carr, rgs 3

Mother Marine Verger testified during the canonisation process: she was zealous for our perfection; after talking to her we felt more fervent than after prayer. You can’t learn this type of leadership. It has to come from within you. Are you leading the life you are teaching

• thers to live? Can they look at you and see how a good religious should be? Do they see

you at prayer? How do you talk to them? Do they feel respected, encouraged. Do they sense that you want the best for them? What is your relationship with your Province, your people in formation? Relationships are formed in community. Our Constitutions tell us in Articles 32.33.34 : Community life is the expression of the mutual love which unites us. Gathered in Christ's name we are a community established in faith, living in hope and striving for perfect charity. Our life together is challenged and directed by a sense of mission.

• 33. The Spirit of Jesus creates the union that exists among us. The gospel, then, is the guide

in our relationships and the Eucharist is at the heart of our community life. As the sacrament

• f love, the Eucharist realizes and deepens our communion with Jesus and, through him, with
• thers.
• 34. At the same time, we have need of one another to arrive at fulfilment in Christ. Because
• ur gifts differ according to the grace given to us, our unity is expressed in diversity.

Reverencing the individuality of every sister, we acknowledge with gratitude that each has been chosen by the Lord and she enriches the whole. We show our gratitude to our aging sisters, valuing the richness of their experience and their presence among us. We comfort our sick sisters in their suffering and give them particular care and attention.” The Constitution goes on to say:

• 35. Reflecting our personal experience of the merciful Shepherd we approach each other with

humility and understanding. Our community should be a special place of reconciliation. When harmony is disturbed we should be ready to pardon and to ask pardon with a sincere heart.

• 36. We freely choose to live in community and to share responsibility for its development; the

leader guides the common effort. In an atmosphere of freedom and joy, friendship and the best human qualities can develop. Our sense of oneness is deepened by community prayer, dialogue, sharing meals, activities and relaxation.

• 37. In the measure in which we are faithful to the demands of community living, we show

forth what the Church is in the world and for the world: a people made one with the unity of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. This life of union enables us to witness and share the joy of the gospel which fills our lives. What can we pick out for special consideration? Community life is:

• 1. An expression of the spirit of the mutual love which unites us…
• 2. Our life together is challenged and directed by a sense of mission…
• 3. The Gospel is the guide in our relationships… and the Gospel tells – Love one

another.

• 4. The Eucharist is at the heart of our community life.

Anne Josephine Carr, rgs 4

• 5. We need each other – you cannot live communion by yourself.
• 6. We freely choose to live in community – sometimes I hear sisters talking as if they

had been forced to come and live in the community! We are completely free to leave if we wish. This Constitution highlights the spirit of communion that should, indeed must, reign among us if we are to be true to our consecration. However, I think that often when we talk about community we are really talking about the common life rather than community. It is possible to live a common life and not be in communion with our sisters. Again it comes back to relationships, to how much I am prepared to give and how much I am prepared to change my attitudes if need be. If of course I am always right, I do not need to change – everyone else must change! There is a quote from a poem by the Scottish poet Robert Burns. It is entitled: “To a Louse” the poet saw one on a lady’s bonnet in church. The last verse is perhaps the most famous; it says: O wad some Power the giftie gie us (O would some power the giftie give us) To see oursels as ithers see us! (To see ourselves as others see us!) It wad frae mony a blunder free us, (It would from many a blunder free us) An' foolish notion: (And foolish notion) What airs in dress an' gait wad lea'e us, (What airs in dress and gait would leave us) An' ev'n devotion! (And even devotion!) Like in leadership, we need realism and humility in community. Mary Euphrasia talks about the community being full of devotion, peaceful, zealous etc. She does not specifically talk about how to live in community other than what the constitutions say. The Constitutions she had would have said the following: To have no eyes to see the faults of others, nor ears to hear them spoken ill of, nor mouth to accuse, nor will to judge and condemn, nor memory to remember anything against them, but a merciful heart to have compassion, a patient spirit to bear with them, a charitable tongue to excuse; such are the effects of the true charity which the daughters of Our Lady of Charity

• ught carefully to practice.

St .John Eudes - Constitutions, 1666

So, where does all this leave us? The thread running through our whole life is relationship. If we look at the way we live our lives we can see that we have moved from a monastic way

• f living to a modern apostolic way of living. What does that mean? We do not live as St.

Mary Euphrasia lived – in large communities all doing the same thing at the same time. When I was young that was how it was. I could be sent to any community in Great Britain and know that the only difference in my life would be what was outside the window and the

Anne Josephine Carr, rgs 5

names of the girls I was to work with. Now, many of us live in single units, many of us, at least in Europe, live in care homes for the elderly. Many of you live in twos and threes in your missions… It is different. Community is essential to us but the Constitutions are quite clear that our structures, our framework of life, are to free us for mission. How do we put these two things together? How do we stress the importance of unity in diversity, the common good of the mission and personal freedom? How can we be a counter-witness to a present day culture that “treats affective relationships in the way we treat material objects and the environment: everything is disposable, everyone uses and throws away, takes and breaks, exploits and squeezes to the last drop. Then goodbye. Narcissism makes people incapable of looking beyond themselves, beyond their own desires and needs.” Amoris Laetitiae N°39 Now, I would like you to go to your groups for 40 mins and come up with what you consider the essentials of community living for Apostolic Good Shepherd Sisters, for the Contemplative sisters it is different. Then we will share together and try to draw up a framework of what is essential to our lives today. SESSION THREE - Part II Mary Euphrasia also had a multiplicity of relationships with lay people. You have asked for some input on partnership. Her relationships with the laity were every bit as diverse as her relationships with the sisters: And here we think of Augustin de Neuville, who gave his whole fortune to the Congregation but not only that, who had such an understanding of our vocation that he counselled Mary Euphrasia on what to look for in a prospective candidate; Genevieve d’Andigné, who was like a second mother to her. She came to live here in the Mother House and advised Mary Euphrasia and travelled with her to Rome. She put her carriage at the Congregation’s disposal; Caroline de Beaufort, to whom Mary Euphrasia counselled spiritual motherhood; Laurence Gittaud, whom she met only twice but to whom she gave the constitutions. Laurence began to take women into her home “in the spirit of the Good Shepherd”. She later became the fundraiser for the Congregation; Eugene Boré, who was a noted oriental expert came to the community here and in the community room gave advice as to how to treat the Muslims before the sisters went to Egypt; the butcher, the bus driver’s wife, the carpenter, each of these people knew her in a different way and all loved her. For this next part, I am drawing on the research done by Sr. Odile Laugier. Sister has done and is doing a wonderful work for the Congregation in helping us all to understand Mary Euphrasia and her world. One example: In 1846, Mary Euphrasia invited the Lady Benefactors of the Good Shepherd in Poitiers to the Mother House : clothing ceremony in the morning, lunch, visit of the house in the afternoon, an "Open Day1" and also a desire for communication and relationship. Let us go back to Eugène Boré (1809 1878) professor at the College of France, orientalist of great renown, came to meet the Community and talk about his perception of the Moslem

• world. It was on 16th February 1843. He was passing through Angers and Mary Euphrasia

1 Letter of Mary Euphrasia Pelletier of 29th March 1846

Anne Josephine Carr, rgs 6

invited him2. For 10 years this man from Anjou had been travelling through several Asian

• countries. He had been led, by different circumstances to open two schools in Persia. He drew

from his experiences a lesson that he communicated to Mary Euphrasia Pelletier. At that moment it was practically impossible to convert the Moslems; I had to find other means of apostolate than simple preaching: the best was the school, open to all children without distinction of race or religion, on the one hand this allowed for the dissipation of the errors Islam has about Christians and on the other, it raised the standing of local Christians which was at rock bottom. Parallel to this, charitable institutions such as hospitals and orphanages, gained the sympathy of the population3. A bachelor of 34 in the cloister ! It is true that later he entered the Lazarist Fathers and even became their Superior General! The Mother House Archives possess 3 letters from Eugène Boré to Mary Euprhasia, which shows us that the relationship continued. We would need to talk about all the visitors mentioned in the texts of the time in order to show the multiplicity and variety of relationships Mary Euphrasia had, from Pauline Jaricot4 working for the Propagation of the Faith, or Mme de Galembert5 who had been accompanied spiritually since 1825 in Tours or again, Mme Jacobsen6, the wife of the Mayor of Noirmoutier in 1852...to the butcher in the rue St Jacques who testified: l loved her like a mother. When she died, l was more upset that when l lost my parents7. Multiplicity of relationships… but what relationships? What sort of relationships? Let us analyse five situations more closely. Laurence GUITAUD A Savoyard (at this time Savoy belonged to the Kingdom of Piedmont), of humble origins: sixth child of a modest delicatessen owner in Chambéry. For health reasons (she was coughing blood - which means she had tuberculosis), she had to leave the Carmel she had entered at 18. Returned to her family she was considered "delicate", she decided to commit herself to good works. First of all she worked at home and used the proceeds of her work to help the 45 women prisoners in Chambéry and their children. In fact she became the auxiliary chaplain to the prison chaplain, Fr. Maurice Revoire. This led her to ask herself what happened to the young women when they got out of prison. She thought of taking them into her own home but the clergy were against it. Through a combination of circumstances

2 Mother House Archives, Annals 3, p.51 3 Quoted from Daniel Rops - The era of the Revolutions 4 Mother House Archives, Annals 2, p.8 5 Quoted in Portais, Biography, Vol. 1, chap. 7- p. 129 in 1898 edition 6 Letter to Mme Jacobsen, 16th August 1852 7 Witness N° 20- Ordinary Process, Jean-Baptiste Schafihaüser, p. 1017/1018

Anne Josephine Carr, rgs 7

Laurence Guitaud came into contact with the Good Shepherd in Grenoble in 1838 at the same time as Mary Euphrasia was travelling to Rome. First meeting of the two women in Le Puy in April 1838: Unfortunately we do not have any details, say the Good Shepherd Archives of Chambéry, on the mutual impression Laurence and the Blessed Mother made on each other, these two souls, both ardent and passionate for good; but we can conjecture that a profound sympathy must have been born out of this meeting, for, if they were never to be sisters by habit and external way of living, they were indeed by sentiment and zeal for souls.8 Mary Euphrasia Pelletier gave Laurence the Constitutions. At the end of May, Laurence rented a house and welcomed the first young girl, Maria, "in the spirit of the Good Shepherd Constitutions". Mary Euphrasia visited her on her return from Rome and Laurence Guitaud succeeded in getting permission from Mr. Martinet for the opening of a house of the Good Shepherd in Chambéry. On 12 January 1839, the first four Sisters arrived in Chambéry with the Bishop's approval, but on condition that they were self-sufficient. So, Laurence Guitaud, not forgetting her prison work, made herself the fund raiser and publicity agent for the Good

• Shepherd. She went as far as Aix-les-Bains, Fribourg, Berne, Turin, Lyon, Ars, and Paris…

She collected large sums of money… at the cost of fatigue, rebuffs - one day she was spat at in the street. She worked in the aristocratic and political worlds and was instrumental in preparing several foundations, notably Turin and Paris. Mary Euphrasia saw her for a second time in 1843 and if, at the present time, we have not found the correspondence between them we know that it existed (by allusions in other correspondence). The Mother House possesses several souvenirs of Mlle Guitaud a portrait, several travel permits signed by King Charles-Albert, a picture of the Blessed Virgin painted by Laurence herself and offered to Mary Euphrasia… What can we conclude from all this for our subject today: Mary Euphrasia recognized in Laurence Guitaud a collaborator, not only a fund raiser. She shared the same faith, the same desire to help these "poor Women", to go out to meet them, to get the welloff interested in their fate. If, from the first meeting, Mary Euphrasia confided the Constitutions to her, she did not put any pressure on her to enter the Good Shepherd. She recognized a partner, one who had a different vocation to hers. The Countess of GRANVILLE Issue of the very old nobility, Caroline de Beaufort,was born in Anvers on 3rd January 1793. Because of the events of the Revolution, her family, like many others, like Mme d’Andigné, like the Count de Neuville, emigrated. Caroline's early infancy was spent abroad. She continued her education in Amiens under the personal direction of Madame Barat, the future St. Madeleine Sophie Barat. Caroline would keep up a correspondence with her old teacher, even after her marriage to the Count de la Granville on 5th August 1818. After her marriage she went to live in the Beauchamps Castle, in a little village of 770 inhabitants about 15 kms from Lille in the north of France. Life there was quite austere for a young woman, especially as the marriage was childless. Encouraged by Sophie Barat who spoke to

8 Bernard Secret - The Good Shepherd in Chambéry. Chambéry, 1940, p. 46

Anne Josephine Carr, rgs 8

her about "spiritual motherhood", the Countess de la Granville became the great benefactress

• f the Works of Lille and the surrounding district.

She made contact with Mary Euphrasia Pelletier on the advice of Sophie Barat and she "tasted" the work of the Good Shepherd: This venerable Mother understood my soul!. She founded the Good Shepherd House in Loos near Lille in the north of France. She would come and eat in the dining room with the young girls several times a year, invite the "little

• nes" to tea in her castle. She herself had taken a private vow of poverty "she sold her jewels

and the unnecessary furniture in her bedroom". This great lady, writer, benefactress of the whole region would build a church, give large sums of money to the Jesuits, to the Sisters of the Infant Jesus, to the Sisters of the Sacred Heart, to the Marist Brothers, but at the Good Shepherd, she shared a little of the life. Mary Euphrasia wrote to Mary of St. Dosithée Joseph about her thus: She is so beloved of God that her works will always be blessed.9 Madame Geneviève du Vau Countess d'Andigné Much better known in the Congregation, the "privileged laywoman" lived in the Convent from 21st November 1833 to her death on 8th July 1846. She knew Mary Euphrasia well before 1833. In fact she had been a childhood friend of Mother Marie Hippolyte de Boëtmilliau who became Superior at Our Lady of Charity in Tours on 27th May 1819 (Mary Euphrasia would succeed her as Superior in 1825). On her return from exile in 1801, Mme d'Andigné strongly supported and encouraged the religious in the reviving of the monasteries and the return to community life after the Revolution. Mme d'Andigné was a friend and benefactress to Mary Euphrasia whom she called "Mother

• f Hope" one day. She was committed to the process undertaken in view of the Generalate:

the first request sent by Mgr. Montault to Rome names "Mme the Countess d'Andigné, sister- in-law to the late Mgr. d'Andigné, Bishop of Nantes, a very respectable and pious lady", as guarantor for the Community10 She was in contact with Fr. Vaurès, a Friars Minor Conventual’s, in Rome. She interceded with the Jesuit Fathers whom she knew well so as to promote the apostolic work. She even made the journey to Paris to meet them. At 77 years of age, she accompanied Mary Euphrasia to Rome in April 1838 in her carriage. For the most part she shared the life of the community. She made meditation, said the Office: her prie-dieu was in the Sisters' Choir behind the stalls. The benefactress not only financed the works of the Congregation but she was a friend and collaborator with our Foundress, putting her relations, her name and her advice at the service

• f the Good Shepherd.

Monsieur Augustin Le Roy de la Potherie de Neuville Like Mme d'Andigné, it is out of the question to share here all that concerns M. de Neuville, a bachelor, devout believer, descendant of a family belonging to the very ancient nobility. He

9 Letter to Sr. M. of St. Dosithée, undated, probably, 1845 10 Mother House Archives, Annals 1 (4) p. 80

Anne Josephine Carr, rgs 9

would put his whole fortune at the service of the Good Shepherd, to the point of cruelly deceiving his nephew and heir, M. de Genouilhac11 He too was committed to the business affairs of the Congregation. During a court case in 1842, M. de Neuville represented the Community and defended its interests. He followed the life of the House in detail: offering the meal when a Bishop came to visit, warm blankets during a cold snap, a bottle of white wine for the chanters during the liturgical feasts or when the Offices were very long. He set up the community library . . . Sometimes his advice was contrary to Mother Pelletier’s plans. For example, he strongly discouraged the foundation in Algeria … which took place all the same! In the Mother House Archives there are 700 letters from M. de Neuville to Mary Euphrasia Pelletier…and one single letter of all the ones the foundress sent to him. According to M. de Neuville's replies, it is possible to deduce that there was a certain spiritual direction of M. Neuville by Mary Euphrasia. Marie-Alexandrine Bertin She came forward spontaneously to witness in favour of Mary Euphrasia during the beatification process: she was 87 years old at the time. She was the daughter of the Post Master (today we could call him the Carrier) "who assured the correspondence between the principle towns around Angers". Her husband took over the business when her father retired. Let us listen to her talking about Mary Euphrasia during her testimony12: I knew her personally. In 1829 she came to Angers in one of our carriages... We stayed in contact throughout her lifetime and I often had to do business with her about the movement of Sisters...She asked us to take good care of her Sisters when they were travelling. I always brought them into a private room and I heard them talking...My husband couldn’t keep quiet about all he saw and heard of the sisters... Their cheerfulness over the inconveniences of the journeys amazed him . . . We never had any business difficulties with her... When she invited us to look at the map of her foundations, I didn’t think it was presumption on her part, but rather desire for the glory

• f God and maybe the thought that she might interest us in her work and then we might be

able to help her in some way. She was always very gracious to me; several times she did me the honour of embracing me. Several times I was invited to the religious feasts at the Good Shepherd...I had great confidence in her. I often saw her in the parlour where we would talk. The time that this worthy religious gave me seemed so precious that I had a scruple about taking up so much of it through my visits... I don't think there is anything to add to this.

11 Cf. Mary Euphrasia's Letters, Vol. V, p. 423, note 6 12 Witness N° 14- Ordinary Process, M. Alexandrine Bertin, p. 966-968

Anne Josephine Carr, rgs 10

Men and women, from humble and well-off milieus, friendly relationships or gratefully courteous… she was in contact with many nations and with all the social classes13 .

• 2. An analysis of some elements

The title "Mary Euphrasia Pelletier and the laity" immediately makes us think of the "financial help" given by lay benefactors to the work of the Good Shepherd. Certainly this financial assistance was indispensable. At that time none of the structures for social help that we have today existed and this whole sector was financed by private means. The only exception to this was from 1852- 1885 when the Good Shepherd received for the underage detainees the board and lodging previously paid to the prisons where they had been before coming to the Good Shepherd : 50 - 80 centimes per day, the normal salary for a day' s work being about 4 or 5 francs. (Added to this there were a certain number of expenses pertaining to this administration, for the transfer of the detainees for example). Sometimes, as a special case, such and such a house would receive payment from a town council or department, but these gifts were neither regular nor very large, hence the place of lay benefactors having the will and means to complete the help given by responsible

• ecclesiastics. Each "Community Letter" contained the names of these benefactors and their

gifts of interventions (organization of a lottery, finding work…). Sometimes the benefactresses (for most of the time it was the women) were grouped together in a Good Shepherd Association. The meetings were held at the Good Shepherd and these women followed the progress of the work. Mary Euphrasia wrote thus to M. of St. Stanislas Bédouet

• n 28th May 1834:

The two letters you wrote .from Grenoble have been passed on to a great number of ladies who, touched by your zeal in Poitiers, cried out with tears of tenderness: "We want to do as much " So, tell our dear benefactresses: "They have saved the two houses ". In 1845, Mary Euphrasia organized a veritable media operation for the foundation of Cairo: 10.000 1eaflets were printed and sent out; a secretariat of four sisters was set up. The Mother House committed itself to giving information about the foundation every year, and this was

• done. This time the leaflets were sent to people known to the Congregation, in certain

embassies and consulates, the most active of the benefactors being charged with the diffusion

• f the information.

As soon as there is question of money an ambiguity can arise: what dependence can exist between the financial backers and the religious community, today we would speak of social actors. With the lay benefactors, notably M. de Neuville, the accent was put on the common mission,

• n the Kingdom of God! Thus, some months before M. de Neuville's death, Mary Euphrasia

sent him feast day greetings and wrote:

13 Witness N°4 - Ordinary Process, M. of St. Jean Chrysostome Royer, p. 650

Anne Josephine Carr, rgs 11

“How can I thank you for all the good you have brought to this mission? Oh, if you could see all the religious vocations who, thanks to you, have been possible, all the conversions which have happened in this house ...» Mary Euphrasia linked the financial help M. de Neuville brought to the realisation of vocations, conversions, so, to spiritual realities. The stakes were less the success of a social or humanitarian project, but directly the evangelisation of the world. Another aspect of the relationship between the community and the laity is that of collaboration, mutual help. In 1848 the economic crisis which had Europe in its grip took on a tragic dimension for the Irish people. Millions of exiles left their country and the poor flooded into the Good Shepherd as to all the charitable institutions. The Community itself was without any resources. The Superior, Sr. Mary of St. Louis Gonzaga de Baligand, brought a Belgian worker to Limerick. Her brief was to pass on her knowledge to the young Irish women, thus giving them work and procuring resources for the house. The community in Mons found the lay lace-maker… thanks to lay friends of the house. In Avignon in 1841, the niece of one of the benefactors, Mlle Aymard, would be "Mistress of Boarder" to fill in for a sick sister.14

• M. de Neuville would take the first steps in English towards the foundation of London. He

put the Good Shepherd in touch with others. Here we have an important aspect of the role of the laity in the life of the Good Shepherd: not

• nly financial aid, administrative or apostolic steps to be taken … but also concrete service.

The lay friends could go where the sisters could not go. They brought caution to the Work and moral support to Mary Euphrasia through the people they knew and their experience. Another dimension of this collaboration touches on understanding and friendship. For Mary Euphrasia, M. de Neuville was the liaison with whom to discuss a foundation, an

• pportunity for construction, a renovation we'd say today. M. de Neuville's letters, for the

most part preserved, are a mine of information on this subject. Thus, we see him meeting postulants and sharing with Mary Euphrasia his impression of such and such a young woman. But his opinion is not determining - it is one of the proofs - and is formulated with prudence. You might find this practice surprising, but M. de Neuville was really a partner, participating in the life of the house. How could Mary Euphrasia Pelletier, cloistered, middle class, without any personal fortune, without contacts through her family, without any other experience than the boarding school in Tours and the Convent, how could she have extended the Congregation throughout the world without the participation of lay people? Even if this participation does not explain all our history, it is impossible to neglect this aspect. Mary Euphrasia trusted certain lay people; she worked with them "so that God might reign in all hearts", each in his own state of life.

14 Letter to M. of St. Felicity Ruffieux, 19th May 1841

Anne Josephine Carr, rgs 12

Regarding M. de Neuville, we have to speak of spiritual friendship. The best proof of this would be Mary Euphrasia's reaction to the Count de Neuville's death: Mary Euphrasia was sorrowful but she resolved to honour his memory by perfecting more and more his work and extending it throughout the universe. This is the same text as the circular letter of 4th December 1843 from the Mother House announcing M. de Neuville's death. In the same vein, Mary Euphrasia wrote to M. of St. John of the Cross David on 8th December 1843: ...alas my dear daughter, the sad death of our incomparable Father has plunged me into an immense torrent of tears, accompanied by a profound peace, an intimate conviction as if this holy Father is delighting in God, he watches over us and works great things ! The proof of the quality of this friendship is on the one hand the profound peace that Mary Euphrasia said she felt, and on the other, the desire to be even more "apostolic". Around the "Holy Work" Mary Euphrasia gathered and collaborated with people of diverse social origins and situations: single people, couples, simple, well-known. Such as Laurence Guitaud, daughter of a pork butcher who got Mme la Vicountess de Lamartine so interested in women in difficulties that she founded the house in Paris. Mary Euphrasia "challenged" society regarding prisoners of 8 and 10 years old, slaves sold in the markets. Mme de la Granville sat in the dining-room in Loos beside young delinquent adolescents. M. de Neuville would die, in poverty, like Pauline Jaricot, the daughter of a business man in Lyon. Rarely expressed, it is true, but real nonetheless, Mary Euphrasia's faithfilled vision of the vocation of the laity in her time astonishes us. Let us read together some extracts from a letter Mary Euphrasia wrote to M. of St. Claire Godelier, the Superior in Namur on 27th May 1840: First of all, let us bless God for the entire signal benefits he accords Namur... Mme Kinet is a rich treasure for us, she is the best of mothers, and she will be so for the beautiful foundation

• f Brussels. Yes, assuredly, this worthy mother must be involved in this great work. We have

asked her to make the journey and see everything for herself, to address herself in everything to Mgr. the Archbishop of Malines... God, my dear daughters, will enlighten each of you. A little remark: She (Mme Kinet) is a rich treasure for us... this worthy mother must be involved in this great work... Faced with the apostolic service asked for from Brussels, the Sister and the lay woman will each play their part, but the Holy Spirit will enlighten both of

• them. Before the Holy Spirit there is no one more privileged than another for the mission. He

gives abundantly to all. There is no superiority of vocation, simply diversity of services. In Conclusion We would like to know more about Mary Euphrasia and the laity… The documents preserved here in Angers are like the tip of the iceberg. We are prisoners of a time which preserved the traces of relationships which could be qualified as "honourable" and more! Little is known of what we would call the "ordinary folk". No doubt, letters lie sleeping in private archives and all that is "known only to God". What marvels of undoubted devotion and what spiritual journeys of such and such a person: I would like to evoke the example of Mlle Ranay, a wealthy benefactress of the convent in

• Louisville. She was 24 years old. Called to the religious life, she entered with the Sisters

Magdalens in Louisville then asked for a transfer to the Sisters Magdalens in Angers 'to live a

Anne Josephine Carr, rgs 13

life known only to God". She was Magdalen of St. Augustine of the Cross. She died on 11th February, 1866 in Angers at the age of 39 years! Let us finish with these words from Mary Euphrasia : To God, to Jesus, to Mary be the glory, the honour, the love ! 22nd Apri11833, to M. of St. Stanislas Bédouet God does marvels for our works... 27th Apri11835, to M. of St. Stanislas Bédouet My dearest daughter, I can't tell you what is happening in the Work! There is something divine, something extraordinary that I can 't explain. 14th June 1839, to M. of St. Stanislas Bédouet The Work is great but the designs of God are greater still!

25th July 1840, to M. of St. Felicity Ruffieux

And so we come back to today. Our mission partners are an important part of our lives. They are the people who help us, do what we cannot do, they “hold the Institute in their arms” as St. Mary Euphrasia put it to the Sisters leaving for the United States. What supports do we give them? What formation? What is their place in your Provinces/ Units? Again, go to your discussion groups for….mins