I humbly entreat Thee through the intercession of the most holy Virgin of Philermo, of St John the Baptist, Blessed Gerard and all the Saints, to keep me faithful to the traditions of our Order. – The daily prayer of the members of the Order of Malta
The struggle over the nature and leadership of the Order of Malta has been much reported, but most accounts leave the reader baffled as to what the issues really are. It may help to set out here the root problems and offer a solution and a glimmer of hope for those who wish the Order well.
The Order of Malta has flourished for 900 years. Other crusading orders have withered or died, but its original nature and purpose remain substantially intact. It was founded to assist pilgrims and serve the sick; it still does this. It was and remains both religious and chivalrous. It once operated as a sovereign state and its sovereignty, despite lacking territory, is still recognised by many countries.
No one questions the importance of the Order’s charitable work, which mobilises almost 100,000 volunteers, employs over 50,000 people and deploys an annual charitable expenditure of over €2 billion . But all its other salient characteristics – its sovereignty, its aristocratic ideals and its religious character – have been attacked by various internal and external factions over the past decade. The Order’s success as a force for good is founded on its ability to retain all three distinctive characteristics.
Sovereignty has enabled it to maintain diplomatic level representation in many of the countries that are in most need of medical aid, facilitating rapid responses to crises. The religious nature of the Order taps the ancient well of Christian charity; what the Order does for humanity, it does not only with love but also with prayer. Its most surprising and interesting quality, perhaps, is its nobiliary character. The Order’s senior positions can only be held by persons who are both noble and professed – those who have taken the triple religious vow of poverty, chastity and obedience.
Much has been written already about the rumbling controversies within the Order, so a thumbnail sketch will suffice. The two wealthiest groups in the Order are the American and German Associations. The Germans are led by aristocrats whose names resonate through the annals of history. The President is Erich, Prinz von Lobkowicz. His family rose to prominence during the Thirty Years War and since then has never been far from the heart of central-European politics. The outgoing Grand Chancellor, Albrecht von Boeselager, is the son of Philipp von Boeselager, who participated in the July Plot against Hitler.
By contrast, the American Association is short of noble members and many seem allergic to the whole concept of nobility, despite the obvious presence of dynasticism in American politics. As the number of Knights who were both noble and professed dwindled, the American party asked for the relaxation or even abolition of the requirement of nobility. This threatened the German leadership, who responded by proposing instead to end the religious requirements.
In 2016 the then Grand Master, the late Fra’ Matthew Festing, an Englishman, dismissed von Boeselager over an administrative issue. The Germans appealed to Pope Francis, who reinstated him. He summoned the Grand Master and demanded that he resign instead, which he did. This very fact called into question the Order’s sovereignty, even though this was not a dismissal but a “request”.
This year the Pope affirmed his recognition of the Order’s sovereignty, but in the same breath now dismissed von Boeselager and imposed a new Lieutenant of the Grand Master – an interim head of the Order – new officers, and a new constitution. To be legal, this would have to be ratified by the Order when it comes into effect in February.
The rank-and-file of the British Association, though generally supportive of the nobiliary principle, is strident in its criticism of the German faction out of indignation at the treatment of the last British Grand Master. In this they play unwittingly into the hands of the American faction.
Meanwhile, the outgoing leadership of the British Association has echoed the protests of von Boeselager, and draws attention to the fact that the new constitution, which is a cut-and-paste effort taken from the constitutions of religious orders, is unworkable in the face of the legal framework of the various charitable organisations managed by the Order. A counterblast from the new Grand Commander missed the point: however laudable the Pope’s intentions may be, the new constitution is in practice unworkable without some major tweaks.
As may be seen, ‘faction” has become a problem in the Order, and there is an urgent need to reunite the members in a way which returns the Order to its ancient charisms and its 900-year-old calling. The Order is free to accept or reject Rome’s diktat; either would be a sovereign decision. But the Order’s sovereignty may be affected if other sovereign bodies start withdrawing their recognition. So far this has not happened, but the danger is there.
The Order’s religious calling is not just a matter of following Catholic teaching and having some professed members. It is strictly bound to the fact that its leaders, and especially the Grand Master, are solemnly professed. Change this, and the Order ceases to be religious – just as it would be meaningless for the Benedictine Abbot Primate to be a secular layman – it would then just be an NGO. The new constitution has recognised and respected this fact.
The Order’s nobiliary charism requires more explanation, because it is foreign to most contemporary thinking. It is an easy claim, but a false one, that hereditary nobility is of no value because it goes against the spirit of the times. So, after all, does the Church; so does the pro-life movement; so did Christ himself. The unthinking assumption that nobility has nothing to offer is partly due to stereotyped ideas of what a nobleman is. Few indeed are those whose titles bring them power – far fewer than those billionaires whose inherited wealth enables them to move markets and influence events. The overwhelming number of titles are purely symbolic.
Yet symbols do have a value, for they can draw people in or repel them. The Order of Malta has always understood the symbolism of noblemen serving the sick and needy. What more Christian message can you think of than the image of a prince or a baroness cleaning the sores and nether parts of an elderly and infirm pilgrim, a common sight at the Order’s annual pilgrimage to Lourdes? The Order of Malta reminds us that nobility is both a calling and a burden. That the Grand Master must be both noble and religious, subject to vows, is not a quirk: it is in the iron logic of the Order’s calling, to be noble in both senses of the word.
However, it does pose a difficulty now that the Order’s membership is drawn from the all the corners of the earth, because in many territories there is a different concept of nobility from that which arose in European Christendom. Reforms famously fall victim to the Law of Unintended Consequences, but is there one reform which could be true to the Order’s principles and strengthen rather than undermine its charisms? Here is a suggestion.
As a sovereign entity the Order has every right to issue grants of arms, which is considered the minimum badge of a nobleman, and has on occasion done so. But it has never had a systematic apparatus for the purpose, no body analogous to the English College of Arms or the Scottish Court of the Lord Lyon. However, this can easily be remedied, for the Order is not short of heraldically literate members. It could therefore establish a College of Heralds with power to examine who would be suitable recipients of a grant of arms. This would vary from country to country, but two categories present themselves as obvious first candidates: those who have shown signal service to the Order, and those who have for three generations been members. The latter is consistent with the mediaeval practice of recognizing as noble those families which had borne arms as knights for three generations.
The establishment of such a College of Heralds would enable the Order to address the multitude of different concepts of “nobility” which exist in various parts of the world. It would have to include experts from all the Order’s Associations who could analyse those analogous hereditary systems which have existed from time immemorial in places as far apart as Nigeria, Hawaii, India and Taiwan. To be credible, it would need to be meticulous, cautious and sparing; inevitably it would become a repository of data and, eventually a centre of academic research. In this way, the Order can extend rather than attenuate its charisms, while answering the criticism that the existing nobiliary requirements may place its different associations on an unequal footing.
This idea is put forward as a solution to a current debate which otherwise risks dissolving a pearl in vinegar, hoping that those who love the Order will see that its ancient charism and tested path still has much to offer, even after the passage of so many centuries.
This page is available to subscribers. Click here to sign in or get access.
Areas of Catholic Herald business are still recovering post-pandemic.
However, we are reaching out to the Catholic community and readership, that has been so loyal to the Catholic Herald. Please join us on our 135 year mission by supporting us.
We are raising £250,000 to safeguard the Herald as a world-leading voice in Catholic journalism and teaching.
We have been a bold and influential voice in the church since 1888, standing up for traditional Catholic culture and values. Please consider donating.