The Rule of Life

13 tion). 4 If anyone is found incorrigible, a plotter, a disturber, giving scandal, after the third admonition he should either be shut in a small room for six months, and unless he returns to his senses, he should be dismissed from the Congregation, or, if he chooses for himself some approved Order, and he will find those who will receive him kindly, let him be commend- ed to this Order. 6. This will be the formula of making profession of vows, when the time of probation is completed: I, N ., son of N ., of the diocese of N ., of N . years of age, freely and of my own will, out of pure love of God, for his greater glory, and the honor of the Virgin, for the assistance of the dead who lack suffrages, especially soldiers and those who died from pestilence, I offer myself to the Divine Majesty, and the Mother of God, the Virgin Mary, in her religious Congregation of the Immaculate Conception of Clerics Recol- 4 This declaration was intended to counteract the growing phenomenon of desertions from the ranks of the Marians. We can easily understand how difficult it was to observe this austere and strict Rule of Life and how, after the initial period of spiritual zeal, the temptation to give up this kind of strict life came to the minds of quite a number of Marians. Father Stani- slaus knew that some canonists and moralists did not think much of the binding force of simple vows (which were considered more in line of mere promises, dispensable by any confessor; in fact the Rule of Life of 1687 in the formula of the profession had “I promise” instead of “I vow” – the poverty, chastity and obedience). So, he re-enforced the simple vows of the Marians with an irrevocable oath of perpetual perseverance in the Congre- gation and tried to obtain in 1692 a decree from the Congregation for Regulars and Bishops stating that only the Holy See could dispense the Marians from their vows, and only for most grave reasons (cf. Positio . pp. 514-15). It is interesting to note that in the 1687 edition of the Rule of Life the Marians were forbidden to leave the Congregation even “under the pre- text of wanting to follow a more strict observance”, since – Fr. Stanislaus argued – “any of you may profess such a strict observance in your present institute” (cf. Positio, p. 463, note “b”). What he meant, was probably that each Marian could apply for the residence in Korabiew Forest house, which was bound to a much more strict – penitential and eremitical – observance than the other Marian houses.