Robert_Wild_-_Catherine_Doherty_Servant_of_God

her life! She said that her whole life had been an attempt
to reflect this reality of the Trinity.
Rublev’s icon of the Trinity is now frequently seen in
Churches, homes, religious establishments. It was not so
in the 1950s. Catherine had the trinitarian vision within
her from her Russian heritage. And whether it was the
frenzy of divine love impelling her to love, or the relations
of the Three Persons among themselves, the trinitarian life
was the model which she actually sought to express in our
lives.
There are two practical dimensions of this theology
that our readers may find of particular interest: our
authority structure for the community; and the concept of
sobornost in electing our directors.
I don’t know of any authority structure in the Church,
past or present, that is quite like that of Madonna House.
We have the three sections of laymen, laywomen and
priests, and each of these groups has an elected director.
Thus, there is no one authority-head of the whole community.
This threesome approach flows from Catherine’s
trinitarian vision:
The governing authorities of Madonna House are the
Directors General. There is a Director General of women, a
Director General of laymen, and a Director General of clergy.
The three, like the most Holy Trinity, must be of one
mind, one heart and one spirit, each consulting the other on
all questions of any importance pertaining to the Apostolate
(flock) of which they are the servants. (Constitution, 26)
I believe that a number of groups in the Church’s history
have started out with both men and women members.
No doubt one of the big challenges they had to face
was men in authority over women, or vice versa. What
Catherine was led to—with her face turned towards the
Trinity—was a kind of division of authority. In matters
which affect the whole community, all three Directors
41