Y
YoungTradCath
Guest
My experience is that people don’t even understand what religious are. They think “sisters” and “brothers” are overly pious women and men who go around teaching First Grade and praying a lot.
- Status
T
TimothyH
Guest
Or they see a habited Dominican sister and think they are a nun. I have been itching to present a session for our adult faith formation on the place of the religious in the Church.
For me personally BrotherJR, no, I understand, even if it is just a basic undersanding. My experience at the monastery taught me about the hidden men who pray for the world for fifty, sixty or seventy years, and no one ever knows their names. I think their real work in prayer starts after they go to Heaven. I ask the unknown and unnamed monks and nuns throughout history to intercede for me often. I say, “I don’t know what your names are, Brother this and Sister that, but please intercede for me.”
I was speaking with one of the Dominican Sisters of St. Cecila (Nashville Dominicans) who teach at our parish school - my daughters teacher as a matter of fact - just last month. I told her how I believe that their presence just walking through the parking lot to get to the school in the morning, going to Mass, and in the late hours of the night when I see the single light on in their house across the street - how this sanctifies our parish without anyone knowing it, silently, discreetly and powerfully. I told her how I was in awe of them and she just asked me to pray for them.
I am in awe of all of you, down to the elderly brother in the infirmary in some monastary in the middle of nowhere. I want to kneel before him and thank him for being a religious for me and for the whole world.
Opus Dei is growning here in Atlanta too. I thanked a man I know for just being a member of Opus Dei, silently and powerfully sanctifying our little corner of the world.
I hope the fact that I have not met too many who feel the way I do is just because it is not discussed much.
-Tim-
O
odile53
Guest
I’d be willing to bet, say, a dozen cream donuts that if someone stood outside a Catholic Church on a Sunday morning and asked 100 people what the difference was between a religious priest and a lay priest, at least 80 percent would not be able to answer the question! I’d also be willing to bet that at least ten percent of the same random sample wouldn’t even know that monks still exist at all.
Doesn’t surprise me at all: Most parishes have to rely on slightly prepared volunteer lay teachers of good will for catechism classes for the kids. CCD pretty much stops after confirmation, and expecting a thirteen year old to retain much of anything is asking a lot. Adult catechesis is almost nonexistent. The interested adult has to rely on various sources, some of which are excellent and some of which are erroneous, full of misinformation, and some of which are just plain off-the-wall (BTW–we have all three categories on CAF!) You, by the way, Br. JR, fall into the first category–excellent, even though it is not the primary purpose of your vocation. But average Joe Catholic has no way of knowing, just by clicking on a website, whether something that is not an official Church website, or the website of a religious order, whether the information is accurate information or a site set up by some looney with an axe to grind who has figured out how to leaven that with religion. The generations that grew up in the sixties and beyond are so poorly catechized that I personally think many of us are just plain too stupid to deserve hell!
When I stopped and thought about communities of male religious in my area I came up with four: Brothers of Mercy (they run a nursing home and rehabilitation facility, most are RNs or physical and occupational therapists, and their nursing home was cited as one of the top ten places to work in Western NY,) the Trappist Abbey of the Genesee (makers of Monk’s Bread, which my husband is under orders from me to pick up on grocery store runs,) the Christian Brothers, who run a high school (and I’m sorry but I do not know which branch of Christian Brothers they are,) and the Jesuits, who are obviously very active. I have heard that there is a monastery of Carmelite brothers across the border from me in the Niagara region of Ontario. I was familiar with the ministry of spiritual direction, having done the Ignatian Exercises under the direction of a Jesuit priest in 19th Ann. format, and I was familiar with the prayer life and schedule of the Trappists since I have been out there a couple of times for personal retreat, and retreatants are welcome to attend Mass and Liturgy of the Hours (that’s how I got “into” private recitation of LOTH in the first place.) Beyond that, minimal contact with lay religious.
I do see your point about thinking in terms of what all these groups “do,” and obviously, labor is how they support themselves. However, that is not what their primary vocation is.
I don’t know what the solution is: Maybe better PR?
Doesn’t surprise me at all: Most parishes have to rely on slightly prepared volunteer lay teachers of good will for catechism classes for the kids. CCD pretty much stops after confirmation, and expecting a thirteen year old to retain much of anything is asking a lot. Adult catechesis is almost nonexistent. The interested adult has to rely on various sources, some of which are excellent and some of which are erroneous, full of misinformation, and some of which are just plain off-the-wall (BTW–we have all three categories on CAF!) You, by the way, Br. JR, fall into the first category–excellent, even though it is not the primary purpose of your vocation. But average Joe Catholic has no way of knowing, just by clicking on a website, whether something that is not an official Church website, or the website of a religious order, whether the information is accurate information or a site set up by some looney with an axe to grind who has figured out how to leaven that with religion. The generations that grew up in the sixties and beyond are so poorly catechized that I personally think many of us are just plain too stupid to deserve hell!
When I stopped and thought about communities of male religious in my area I came up with four: Brothers of Mercy (they run a nursing home and rehabilitation facility, most are RNs or physical and occupational therapists, and their nursing home was cited as one of the top ten places to work in Western NY,) the Trappist Abbey of the Genesee (makers of Monk’s Bread, which my husband is under orders from me to pick up on grocery store runs,) the Christian Brothers, who run a high school (and I’m sorry but I do not know which branch of Christian Brothers they are,) and the Jesuits, who are obviously very active. I have heard that there is a monastery of Carmelite brothers across the border from me in the Niagara region of Ontario. I was familiar with the ministry of spiritual direction, having done the Ignatian Exercises under the direction of a Jesuit priest in 19th Ann. format, and I was familiar with the prayer life and schedule of the Trappists since I have been out there a couple of times for personal retreat, and retreatants are welcome to attend Mass and Liturgy of the Hours (that’s how I got “into” private recitation of LOTH in the first place.) Beyond that, minimal contact with lay religious.
I do see your point about thinking in terms of what all these groups “do,” and obviously, labor is how they support themselves. However, that is not what their primary vocation is.
I don’t know what the solution is: Maybe better PR?
C
CB_Catholic
Guest
I am probably your average Catholic woman who grew up in the 50’s and 60’s and was taught by Sisters at my Catholic grade school, but I had little, if any, exposure to religious Brothers. I knew some of them taught school, but not in my area, and some were Missionaries (again, not in my area), and the rest were in monasteries (in my area, but no contact). They just were not there for me to know or observe or think about very much.
As for the Franciscans and Dominicans, I thought they were all priests, because the ones I came into contact with WERE priests. And I really did not have a way to expand my world until I grew up and could do it on my own, if I had a mind to.
There are monasteries in my area, unfortunately the Carmelites left a few years ago, the Franciscans are priests (all 2 of them) and the one where I run into the Brothers are the Paulines (SSP) who are in the media, and show up at all the conferences, retreats, events, etc., doing some broadcasting and peddling their wares, and work at their bookstores. They make it their business to be known. Again, though, like you said, it’s what they DO that identifies them to me. (And they are wonderful men).
I don’t think I am much different than most Catholic women, even from the pre Vat. II era I grew up in. Just not exposed to them, although the men might have more exposure from schools.
As for the Franciscans and Dominicans, I thought they were all priests, because the ones I came into contact with WERE priests. And I really did not have a way to expand my world until I grew up and could do it on my own, if I had a mind to.
There are monasteries in my area, unfortunately the Carmelites left a few years ago, the Franciscans are priests (all 2 of them) and the one where I run into the Brothers are the Paulines (SSP) who are in the media, and show up at all the conferences, retreats, events, etc., doing some broadcasting and peddling their wares, and work at their bookstores. They make it their business to be known. Again, though, like you said, it’s what they DO that identifies them to me. (And they are wonderful men).
I don’t think I am much different than most Catholic women, even from the pre Vat. II era I grew up in. Just not exposed to them, although the men might have more exposure from schools.
M
maltmom
Guest
In New Orleans you can’t hardly throw a baseball without hitting a Catholic church. Growing up as a non-Catholic I was aware of schools such as Brother Martin (Brothers of the Sacred Heart), DeLaSalle and Jesuit to name a few. I grew up thinking that Brothers were the male equivalent of Nuns. As a non-Catholic…out of sight, out of mind.
Since joining the forum Brother Jay has taught me so much about religious life. I don’t look at the Brothers as being the appendix of the body. They are a vital part of the Body of Christ.
I had no idea there were religious and lay Priests. To me a Priest is a Priest. At first Brother Jay’s posts about the two were confusing. Fortunately, after reading a number of his posts it all came together.
I was just thinking about how in movies and TV shows we see Nuns much more often than Brothers. I wonder if that has something to do with our lack of knowledge as well.
Since joining the forum Brother Jay has taught me so much about religious life. I don’t look at the Brothers as being the appendix of the body. They are a vital part of the Body of Christ.
I had no idea there were religious and lay Priests. To me a Priest is a Priest. At first Brother Jay’s posts about the two were confusing. Fortunately, after reading a number of his posts it all came together.
I was just thinking about how in movies and TV shows we see Nuns much more often than Brothers. I wonder if that has something to do with our lack of knowledge as well.
M
Mrs_Sally
Guest
I think the early answers nailed it. We (modern people in general, not just Americans) have no real idea about what prayer is and why it is important. The idea that the prayers of 50 righteous men are supporting the generation is considered a fairy story. 
I think the idea that people who don’t “do” anything visible are useless or invisible themselves is widespread. Wives and retirees suffer as well.
But to find that not just among the laity who maybe excused by not having ever even met a religious brother (or a religious sister/nun who isn’t a teacher), but among priests and religious sisters who should at least understand the concept of a person who lives soley for God.
I think the idea that people who don’t “do” anything visible are useless or invisible themselves is widespread. Wives and retirees suffer as well.
But to find that not just among the laity who maybe excused by not having ever even met a religious brother (or a religious sister/nun who isn’t a teacher), but among priests and religious sisters who should at least understand the concept of a person who lives soley for God.
J
JReducation
Guest
Before we go deeper into this tradition and its place in the Church, I think that we need to understand the vocabulary.
VOCABULARY LIST
Clergy – deacon, priest and bishop
Lay – any man or woman who is not clergy
Religious – any man or woman whose life IS consecrated to God by the observance of the Evangelical Counsels, living in a stable community of religious approved by the Church, and is celibate
Consecrated life – the life of one who has made vows to remain a virgin or to live in a religious community under chastity, poverty and obedience. Some communities have a fourth vow.
Secular – any man or woman who IS NOT consecrated to God by the Evangelical Counsels
Secularism – not the same as secular. The secular person belongs to the world and lives in the world, but has his eyes set on God. Secularism is living in the world, belonging to the world and focusing one’s gaze on things of the world such as inordinate power, surplus wealth and inappropriate pleasure.
Consecrated – a person, an object or a place designated, by the Church, for the service of God. In the case of a person, the individual is consecrated, not his way of life.
Layman or woman – any man or woman who is neither clergy nor a consecrated religious; he or she is a member of the laity.
Now, let’s use these terms, so that we may understand them better.
Maria is a woman
Maria is lay
Maria is married
Therefore, Maria is a secular lay woman
¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬
Martha is a woman
Women cannot be ordained
Therefore, Martha is lay
Martha is lay
A woman who is lay can consecrate her life to live the Evangelical Counsels
Therefore, Martha can be a consecrated religious
Martha is lay
Martha is a consecrated religious
Therefore, Martha is no longer part of the laity
If Martha is no longer part of the laity, she is no longer a laywoman.
¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬
John is lay
John is a Benedictine
Therefore, John is a consecrated religious
John is a consecrated religious
Therefore, John is no longer a layman
John is lay
Therefore, John is not a cleric or clergyman
We call John a religious
¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬
Pepe is a priest
Therefore, Pepe is not lay.
Pepe is not lay
Therefore, Pepe is not part of the laity.
Pepe is a priest
Pepe does not belong to a religious community.
Pepe belongs to the diocese
Therefore, Pepe is a secular man who is a priest, we call him a secular priest.
¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬
Chen is a priest
Chen is also a Franciscan
Therefore, Chen is a religious and a priest, we call him a regular priest
¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬
Joseph Ratzinger does not belong to a religious community.
Joseph Ratzinger is not a hermit either
Therefore, Joseph Ratzinger is a secular man.
If Joseph Ratzinger is a secular man,
He does not live a consecrated life with vows and community
Joseph Ratzinger is a priest
Joseph Ratzinger does on live a consecrated life
Therefore, Joseph Ratzinger is a secular priest.
Joseph Ratzinger was elected pope
Therefore, the pope is a secular priest.
If this pope is a secular priest,
Then he is not a consecrated religious.
Hope this helps
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
VOCABULARY LIST
Clergy – deacon, priest and bishop
Lay – any man or woman who is not clergy
Religious – any man or woman whose life IS consecrated to God by the observance of the Evangelical Counsels, living in a stable community of religious approved by the Church, and is celibate
Consecrated life – the life of one who has made vows to remain a virgin or to live in a religious community under chastity, poverty and obedience. Some communities have a fourth vow.
Secular – any man or woman who IS NOT consecrated to God by the Evangelical Counsels
Secularism – not the same as secular. The secular person belongs to the world and lives in the world, but has his eyes set on God. Secularism is living in the world, belonging to the world and focusing one’s gaze on things of the world such as inordinate power, surplus wealth and inappropriate pleasure.
Consecrated – a person, an object or a place designated, by the Church, for the service of God. In the case of a person, the individual is consecrated, not his way of life.
Layman or woman – any man or woman who is neither clergy nor a consecrated religious; he or she is a member of the laity.
Now, let’s use these terms, so that we may understand them better.
Maria is a woman
Maria is lay
Maria is married
Therefore, Maria is a secular lay woman
¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬
Martha is a woman
Women cannot be ordained
Therefore, Martha is lay
Martha is lay
A woman who is lay can consecrate her life to live the Evangelical Counsels
Therefore, Martha can be a consecrated religious
Martha is lay
Martha is a consecrated religious
Therefore, Martha is no longer part of the laity
If Martha is no longer part of the laity, she is no longer a laywoman.
¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬
John is lay
John is a Benedictine
Therefore, John is a consecrated religious
John is a consecrated religious
Therefore, John is no longer a layman
John is lay
Therefore, John is not a cleric or clergyman
We call John a religious
¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬
Pepe is a priest
Therefore, Pepe is not lay.
Pepe is not lay
Therefore, Pepe is not part of the laity.
Pepe is a priest
Pepe does not belong to a religious community.
Pepe belongs to the diocese
Therefore, Pepe is a secular man who is a priest, we call him a secular priest.
¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬
Chen is a priest
Chen is also a Franciscan
Therefore, Chen is a religious and a priest, we call him a regular priest
¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬
Joseph Ratzinger does not belong to a religious community.
Joseph Ratzinger is not a hermit either
Therefore, Joseph Ratzinger is a secular man.
If Joseph Ratzinger is a secular man,
He does not live a consecrated life with vows and community
Joseph Ratzinger is a priest
Joseph Ratzinger does on live a consecrated life
Therefore, Joseph Ratzinger is a secular priest.
Joseph Ratzinger was elected pope
Therefore, the pope is a secular priest.
If this pope is a secular priest,
Then he is not a consecrated religious.
Hope this helps
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
M
Melchior_1
Guest
A nice summary. Care to take a stab of explaining how Secular Orders work with the above titles?Before we go deeper into this tradition and its place in the Church, I think that we need to understand the vocabulary.
VOCABULARY LIST
Clergy – deacon, priest and bishop
Lay – any man or woman who is not clergy
Religious – any man or woman whose life IS consecrated to God by the observance of the Evangelical Counsels, living in a stable community of religious approved by the Church, and is celibate
Consecrated life – the life of one who has made vows to remain a virgin or to live in a religious community under chastity, poverty and obedience. Some communities have a fourth vow.
Secular – any man or woman who IS NOT consecrated to God by the Evangelical Counsels
Secularism – not the same as secular. The secular person belongs to the world and lives in the world, but has his eyes set on God. Secularism is living in the world, belonging to the world and focusing one’s gaze on things of the world such as inordinate power, surplus wealth and inappropriate pleasure.
Consecrated – a person, an object or a place designated, by the Church, for the service of God. In the case of a person, the individual is consecrated, not his way of life.
Layman or woman – any man or woman who is neither clergy nor a consecrated religious; he or she is a member of the laity.
Now, let’s use these terms, so that we may understand them better.
Maria is a woman
Maria is lay
Maria is married
Therefore, Maria is a secular lay woman
¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬
Martha is a woman
Women cannot be ordained
Therefore, Martha is lay
Martha is lay
A woman who is lay can consecrate her life to live the Evangelical Counsels
Therefore, Martha can be a consecrated religious
Martha is lay
Martha is a consecrated religious
Therefore, Martha is no longer part of the laity
If Martha is no longer part of the laity, she is no longer a laywoman.
¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬
John is lay
John is a Benedictine
Therefore, John is a consecrated religious
John is a consecrated religious
Therefore, John is no longer a layman
John is lay
Therefore, John is not a cleric or clergyman
We call John a religious
¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬
Pepe is a priest
Therefore, Pepe is not lay.
Pepe is not lay
Therefore, Pepe is not part of the laity.
Pepe is a priest
Pepe does not belong to a religious community.
Pepe belongs to the diocese
Therefore, Pepe is a secular man who is a priest, we call him a secular priest.
¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬
Chen is a priest
Chen is also a Franciscan
Therefore, Chen is a religious and a priest, we call him a regular priest
¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬
Joseph Ratzinger does not belong to a religious community.
Joseph Ratzinger is not a hermit either
Therefore, Joseph Ratzinger is a secular man.
If Joseph Ratzinger is a secular man,
He does not live a consecrated life with vows and community
Joseph Ratzinger is a priest
Joseph Ratzinger does on live a consecrated life
Therefore, Joseph Ratzinger is a secular priest.
Joseph Ratzinger was elected pope
Therefore, the pope is a secular priest.
If this pope is a secular priest,
Then he is not a consecrated religious.
Hope this helps
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
J
JReducation
Guest
Easily . . . to be a religious you must meet at least two of the following:A nice summary. Care to take a stab of explaining how Secular Orders work with the above titles?
a. Be consecrated to live the evangelical counsels of chastity, poverty and obedience
b. Belong to a community of consecrated life
c. Be celibate
A secular order does not require b and c.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
C
clem456
Guest
Until I came to this site about a year ago I was not aware of these distinctions in vocation. I knew Benedict Groeschel was a different kind of priest somehow, but had no idea as to differences in spirituality. I suppose I assumed that all brothers were monks who baked bread and brewed beer or something like that, wearing a brown hoodie robe and helping the priests to do something or other. Really had no idea. So this has been great education for me pesonally.
When I came up, priests were held in high esteem by our parents. They were really somebody and set apart from the rest of us. They were considered to BE somebody, people who DID something valuable for the Church. There was almost an idolization. They were valued for what they provided for the Church. If you sent a son to the seminary, you were special also. I believe it was an unhealthy focus on prestige and position.
This attitude about the utility of vocation and spirituality became entrenched in my own life. My spirituality became focused on the accomplishment of great things of value, rather than on first having a relationship with the living God. It is a very frustrating pursuit, because God is in the trunk as we spiritual infants attempt to drive the car and accomplish our ends. Frustration leads to a lack of appreciation for the present condition, the call that God is putting right in front of our face, here now, today. I was always looking for the way in which God wanted be to be useful, not considering that I needed to shut up and listen, that God provided me a call in my present condition. Some things appeared to me to be useless in the spiritual life…things like silence, solitude, simple obedience, charity in the face of anger, ignorance, and “errors”. A huge struggle for me.
So thanks to the religious that give us an example of prayer and adoration, showing us how to be, with God, calling attention to His greatness and not how useful we are.
When I came up, priests were held in high esteem by our parents. They were really somebody and set apart from the rest of us. They were considered to BE somebody, people who DID something valuable for the Church. There was almost an idolization. They were valued for what they provided for the Church. If you sent a son to the seminary, you were special also. I believe it was an unhealthy focus on prestige and position.
This attitude about the utility of vocation and spirituality became entrenched in my own life. My spirituality became focused on the accomplishment of great things of value, rather than on first having a relationship with the living God. It is a very frustrating pursuit, because God is in the trunk as we spiritual infants attempt to drive the car and accomplish our ends. Frustration leads to a lack of appreciation for the present condition, the call that God is putting right in front of our face, here now, today. I was always looking for the way in which God wanted be to be useful, not considering that I needed to shut up and listen, that God provided me a call in my present condition. Some things appeared to me to be useless in the spiritual life…things like silence, solitude, simple obedience, charity in the face of anger, ignorance, and “errors”. A huge struggle for me.
So thanks to the religious that give us an example of prayer and adoration, showing us how to be, with God, calling attention to His greatness and not how useful we are.
J
JReducation
Guest
There are number of sad things here that deprived the faithful of a part of Catholic Tradition that has been with us since the time of Christ. It’s all rooted in pride, materialism and ignorance.
I remember sitting at a dinner table with a group at a conference. At the table was a sister. I won’t mention the congregation. In any case, as the conversation progressed, someone asked a theological question and I responded saying: “Gregory the Great said, Robert Bellarmine said this, Aquinas said that and so forth.” The sister turned to the others at the table and said, “If you want to make sure that you get a good theological answer, go to a priest.”
One of the lay people asked why, since the brother at the table is a doctor of theology. Her response was, “What’s a brother? He’s a no body in the Church.”
Now, there is a reason why sisters often felt this way and why they discouraged their talented boys from becoming brothers. Most communities of sisters are educators. They have very little formation in spirituality and theology. Usually a few credits at the undergraduate level, unless a sister goes for a theology degree she’s usually a math, English, science, art or some other academic expert. Hence the issues with the LCWR.
In addition, these teaching communities often taught at parish schools. Parishes are run by priests. They grew up with the idea that the priest has all the answers. If you have a leaky roof in the school, Father will get it fixed. If you have a budget problem, Father will fix it. If you need spiritual direction or confession, there is no one else to go to, but Father. They knew that there are male religious who are not priests, but they had no relationship with them. Gradually, the distance turned into condescension.
Diocesan priests are in a different boat. In diocesan seminaries, they study Canon Law and pastoral counseling. They do not study the laws that apply to the religious life, the laity or the secular orders. They don’t know what the Church says about these groups. They study counseling, because they’ll be doing a lot of that in the parish. The do not study Catholic Spirituality. When they speak about moral and doctrinal issues, they are speaking from the writings of the systemtic theologians such as Aquinas, Augustine and Bonaventure. They are not really familiar with the spiritual journey of the soul and the different paths that God uses to draw the soul to him and through which God nurtures the Church. This is out of their scope of knowledge, unless they get a specialized theological degree after their M.Div., as I had to do. I never had much background in Catholic Spirituality during the four years of the M.Div.
These men and women were disabled to a certain extent. I truly believe that for some people it is easier to be dismissive than to say that they don’t understand something or know little about it. I have a spiritual director who is a diocesan priest. The reason that I use him is because he’s one of the holiest men I know. How do I know this? He is humble.
When I first approached him to ask him to direct my soul, the first thing that came out of his mouth was, “You’ll have to help me, because the only thing I know about the religious life is that there are different orders founded by different people. I’m not even familiar with the lives of these founders, never mind their spirituality and their vision.”
So when I go to him I always begin with “St. Francis sadi . . . .” However, I’m having trouble in that area, because . . . " I give him the background on St. Francis then proceed to my problem. After 10 years, he’s become an expert in Franciscan spirituality and loves it. He’s even grown a beard. LOL
One day he said, “The more that we talk, the more that I realize that there is a qualitative difference between being and doing. You brothers, seem to understand the importance of being and the need that the Church has for men and women who ARE faithful to the Gospel, regardless of what they do.”
I believe that this is the tradition that we need to rediscover, the tradition of fidelity to the Gospel, regardless of the external work.
It is my opinion that those religious communities of brothers and sisters that have been decimated after Vatican II did not understand what Vatican II called for. The Council said, “Get back to your roots.” This did not mean go back and look at what your first generation religious DID. It meant go back and look at how your first generation religious in your community LIVED. Recover that life, built into that life is the vision that the Holy Spirit gave to the founder and that the Church approved. That vision is expressed through a charism, which may be teaching, service to the poor, preaching, etc. But there is a core spirituality that can never change or you cease to be what the Holy Spirit intended for your order to be. Many communities focused on what their founders and first generation religious did, but did not focus on how they lived and more importantly, on how they prayed.
If you want to understand a person’s spirituality, pay attention to his prayer. Do you want to understand St.Francis, read his prayers, read what others say about his life of prayer. The same goes for all the saints. Once you get that, then you have the basics to understand the vision that God gave that founder for his community. If you understand the vision, the charism is easy. If the vision is that all Christian children should come to know truth through faith and science, then you open schools. There is your charism, teaching.
That’s how the tradition of religious life serves the life of the whole Mystical Body. I hope this helps.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
I remember sitting at a dinner table with a group at a conference. At the table was a sister. I won’t mention the congregation. In any case, as the conversation progressed, someone asked a theological question and I responded saying: “Gregory the Great said, Robert Bellarmine said this, Aquinas said that and so forth.” The sister turned to the others at the table and said, “If you want to make sure that you get a good theological answer, go to a priest.”
One of the lay people asked why, since the brother at the table is a doctor of theology. Her response was, “What’s a brother? He’s a no body in the Church.”
Now, there is a reason why sisters often felt this way and why they discouraged their talented boys from becoming brothers. Most communities of sisters are educators. They have very little formation in spirituality and theology. Usually a few credits at the undergraduate level, unless a sister goes for a theology degree she’s usually a math, English, science, art or some other academic expert. Hence the issues with the LCWR.
In addition, these teaching communities often taught at parish schools. Parishes are run by priests. They grew up with the idea that the priest has all the answers. If you have a leaky roof in the school, Father will get it fixed. If you have a budget problem, Father will fix it. If you need spiritual direction or confession, there is no one else to go to, but Father. They knew that there are male religious who are not priests, but they had no relationship with them. Gradually, the distance turned into condescension.
Diocesan priests are in a different boat. In diocesan seminaries, they study Canon Law and pastoral counseling. They do not study the laws that apply to the religious life, the laity or the secular orders. They don’t know what the Church says about these groups. They study counseling, because they’ll be doing a lot of that in the parish. The do not study Catholic Spirituality. When they speak about moral and doctrinal issues, they are speaking from the writings of the systemtic theologians such as Aquinas, Augustine and Bonaventure. They are not really familiar with the spiritual journey of the soul and the different paths that God uses to draw the soul to him and through which God nurtures the Church. This is out of their scope of knowledge, unless they get a specialized theological degree after their M.Div., as I had to do. I never had much background in Catholic Spirituality during the four years of the M.Div.
These men and women were disabled to a certain extent. I truly believe that for some people it is easier to be dismissive than to say that they don’t understand something or know little about it. I have a spiritual director who is a diocesan priest. The reason that I use him is because he’s one of the holiest men I know. How do I know this? He is humble.
When I first approached him to ask him to direct my soul, the first thing that came out of his mouth was, “You’ll have to help me, because the only thing I know about the religious life is that there are different orders founded by different people. I’m not even familiar with the lives of these founders, never mind their spirituality and their vision.”
So when I go to him I always begin with “St. Francis sadi . . . .” However, I’m having trouble in that area, because . . . " I give him the background on St. Francis then proceed to my problem. After 10 years, he’s become an expert in Franciscan spirituality and loves it. He’s even grown a beard. LOL
One day he said, “The more that we talk, the more that I realize that there is a qualitative difference between being and doing. You brothers, seem to understand the importance of being and the need that the Church has for men and women who ARE faithful to the Gospel, regardless of what they do.”
I believe that this is the tradition that we need to rediscover, the tradition of fidelity to the Gospel, regardless of the external work.
It is my opinion that those religious communities of brothers and sisters that have been decimated after Vatican II did not understand what Vatican II called for. The Council said, “Get back to your roots.” This did not mean go back and look at what your first generation religious DID. It meant go back and look at how your first generation religious in your community LIVED. Recover that life, built into that life is the vision that the Holy Spirit gave to the founder and that the Church approved. That vision is expressed through a charism, which may be teaching, service to the poor, preaching, etc. But there is a core spirituality that can never change or you cease to be what the Holy Spirit intended for your order to be. Many communities focused on what their founders and first generation religious did, but did not focus on how they lived and more importantly, on how they prayed.
If you want to understand a person’s spirituality, pay attention to his prayer. Do you want to understand St.Francis, read his prayers, read what others say about his life of prayer. The same goes for all the saints. Once you get that, then you have the basics to understand the vision that God gave that founder for his community. If you understand the vision, the charism is easy. If the vision is that all Christian children should come to know truth through faith and science, then you open schools. There is your charism, teaching.
That’s how the tradition of religious life serves the life of the whole Mystical Body. I hope this helps.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
M
Marauder
Guest
My take is that it depends on how much exposure a lay person has to religious people. You average lay person very rarely sees a religious brother unless they are speaking/serving at a parish Mass.
I personally go to Mass a lot at a Conventual Franciscan chapel and many of the other people that just attend Mass there and not any of the other functions don’t know the fact that not all the brothers are ordained. Some still have the different view on the ordained brothers vs. the non-ordained brothers. Obviously most of the people in OFS know the difference and as the people attend more events and meet the friars and postulants personally they learn more and more about what the real life of a friar is like (at least at this friary.)
From my experience most Catholic lay people don’t have this type of exposure. My bet most Catholics now go to public school, so they don’t have any exposure to the sisters/religious brothers that use to teach at Catholic schools. Even those that do go to Catholic school, don’t see that presence as often since most teachers are now lay people.
I feel blessed to have a local Franciscan friary, to be able to go to the Franciscan “Monastery” in DC on several occasions, and to meet various religious when I volunteer at the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception and walking around Catholic University. I can’t imagine what it is like to live in areas throughout the country with much smaller Catholic populations and/or presence.
I personally go to Mass a lot at a Conventual Franciscan chapel and many of the other people that just attend Mass there and not any of the other functions don’t know the fact that not all the brothers are ordained. Some still have the different view on the ordained brothers vs. the non-ordained brothers. Obviously most of the people in OFS know the difference and as the people attend more events and meet the friars and postulants personally they learn more and more about what the real life of a friar is like (at least at this friary.)
From my experience most Catholic lay people don’t have this type of exposure. My bet most Catholics now go to public school, so they don’t have any exposure to the sisters/religious brothers that use to teach at Catholic schools. Even those that do go to Catholic school, don’t see that presence as often since most teachers are now lay people.
I feel blessed to have a local Franciscan friary, to be able to go to the Franciscan “Monastery” in DC on several occasions, and to meet various religious when I volunteer at the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception and walking around Catholic University. I can’t imagine what it is like to live in areas throughout the country with much smaller Catholic populations and/or presence.
L
Luigi_Daniele
Guest
Our Catholic schools near us have almost no non-secular (secular as in non-religious/non-priests) as teachers.
M
maltmom
Guest
What a horrible thing for her to say on so many levels. I can understand a convert or even some cradle Catholics not understanding the place of our Brothers within the Church. I find it sad that a Sister would say things like this. What an ignorant and rude thing to do. I hope you contacted her Superior to open a dialogue to inform the Sisters as to who our Brothers are and how they function with in the Church. :nope:
I bet you needed a triple brandy after that one.
J
JReducation
Guest
I didn’t contact her superior. I was very angry and told my superior about what happened. My superior at the time was an Italian priest, with temper and all. He invited Sister to visit him.
On another note . . .
I understand that most Catholics do not know much about religious life, because they have little contact with religious and the few religious whom they meet are either regular priests or school sisters. That being said, my original question is still up there.
You see . . . when you explain religious life to a Catholic who does not understand it and you tell him or her that its been part of the Judeo-Christian tradition before Christ. It was brought to Christianity from Judaism by the Fathers of the Desert, you still get the same question as an answer. “What do they do?”
It always blows my mind, because I want to ask people if they stay married because of what their spouse does or because of who their spouse is to them or your children or your parents.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
L
Luigi_Daniele
Guest
Brother,On another note . . .
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
A small aside, if I may. I noticed in your blog link, that your habit is white (not brown or gray). May I ask the symbolism? (You do not have to answer here, or at all).
J
JReducation
Guest
My habit is actually grey. That bolt of cloth is a very light grey and under the light where I was sitting it looks white. We have two other challenges here. First is that as you wash them, because the fabric is cheap, they fade. Second, because the fabric is cheap, it gets bleached by the Florida sun. I think there is a picture of one of the novices on that blog. His habit is brand new. You can see the original shade of grey when it starts. Mine was two shades lighter, it’s even worse. It’s in great shape, so I keep it.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
L
Luigi_Daniele
Guest
Thanks for the kind response, fratello
J
JReducation
Guest
You’re welcome. I’m going to start wearing a white mantilla so people can see the contrast.Thanks for the kind response, fratello
Mantillas are very traditional.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
E
edwest2
Guest
To JReducation,
During the 1950s and early 1960s, the United States was steeped in Christianity. There is no connection to Vatican II here. No misunderstanding, just ongoing comments here that amount to “Blame it on Bush!” er… uh… Vatican II.
Growing up in the late 1950s, it was all centered on God. Our daily lives were about politeness, friendship, respect, honoring our mother and father and sensitivity toward the other and great fun, and understanding tragedy and death as just part of life. Everything we saw or heard was beautiful in some way. No, it was not perfect, but we were taught self-respect, respect for others, respect towards the opposite sex, and to avoid the bad kids while being polite to them. Having gone to a Catholic school, we had Religion class and it was not uncommon to hear that someone wanted to be a priest or a nun.
I ate, slept and believed. Going to Church on Sunday and Holy Days of Obligation were a part of me. They weren’t just obligations. No, I’m not suggesting it was perfect but even our government was respectful toward Christianity. We received a Catholic magazine each month. Every Christmas, there was a beautiful editorial about the birth of Christ. I was surrounded by a number of very good Catholic and non-Catholic role models.
Then something happened in the late 1960s.
catholichistory.net/Events/LandOLakesStatement.htm
Very intelligent men and women abused our trust, our deeply established compassion, and violated our sensibilities.
online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704586504574654282563939764.html
There are communities I drive to where I can still feel the Holy Spirit. I see the people living as people, not as slaves to a false “freedom.” Not as the opposite to the Christian Community and country I grew up in. I say this as a fact, and there’s good scholarship to back up my statements.
I remember watching TV not long ago and seeing a priest, arms outstretched, laying across the stone steps of a public building as a religious monument was being removed by court order.
I will never lose what it means to be a functional Catholic.
God bless,
Ed
During the 1950s and early 1960s, the United States was steeped in Christianity. There is no connection to Vatican II here. No misunderstanding, just ongoing comments here that amount to “Blame it on Bush!” er… uh… Vatican II.
Growing up in the late 1950s, it was all centered on God. Our daily lives were about politeness, friendship, respect, honoring our mother and father and sensitivity toward the other and great fun, and understanding tragedy and death as just part of life. Everything we saw or heard was beautiful in some way. No, it was not perfect, but we were taught self-respect, respect for others, respect towards the opposite sex, and to avoid the bad kids while being polite to them. Having gone to a Catholic school, we had Religion class and it was not uncommon to hear that someone wanted to be a priest or a nun.
I ate, slept and believed. Going to Church on Sunday and Holy Days of Obligation were a part of me. They weren’t just obligations. No, I’m not suggesting it was perfect but even our government was respectful toward Christianity. We received a Catholic magazine each month. Every Christmas, there was a beautiful editorial about the birth of Christ. I was surrounded by a number of very good Catholic and non-Catholic role models.
Then something happened in the late 1960s.
catholichistory.net/Events/LandOLakesStatement.htm
Very intelligent men and women abused our trust, our deeply established compassion, and violated our sensibilities.
online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704586504574654282563939764.html
There are communities I drive to where I can still feel the Holy Spirit. I see the people living as people, not as slaves to a false “freedom.” Not as the opposite to the Christian Community and country I grew up in. I say this as a fact, and there’s good scholarship to back up my statements.
I remember watching TV not long ago and seeing a priest, arms outstretched, laying across the stone steps of a public building as a religious monument was being removed by court order.
I will never lose what it means to be a functional Catholic.
God bless,
Ed
- Status