Church, Religious Orders after Vatican II

[jwinch2]

I don’t mean to sound insensitive. But I think if the Franciscans stayed, they would probably have decided to call in a truce, decided to even educate the Reformers on their own theology and writings of Luther while performing charity work in those areas, no?

I am just saying by extrapolating their approach in the Holy Land with Islam etc. In my eyes, Franciscans seem to have been heading toward an era where they consider attracting people merely by compassion. Not that is a bad thing. But I feel that compassion must always be preceded and followed by words that utter the truth. Often the phrase “Preach the gospel at all times – If necessary, use words.” gets mentioned to make it look like words aren’t that important. But if we look at Christianity, it is based and shared for generations through the word of God. Not merely the acts of God.

In my humble opinion, I think this is where the methods of the Franciscans fail. For their method of kind and compassionate acts can be carried out by even an atheist, muslim or Protestant. Perhaps it is why we are starting to loose many faithful as the church becomes more “Franciscan” in its approach toward non-Catholic faiths or lack of faith. The truth can be proclaimed by only those who have the truth. Compassion can be shown by anyone. So I think it is by proclaiming the truth with words that we can win the battle against any heresy, schism, or crisis in the church.

In a sense, it is in doing so that we will show true compassion toward our neighbor.

I think you need to be a bit careful here, particularly in making the statement that the method of the Franciscans fail. As Brother pointed out once before on another thread, when Francis was trying to get his Rule approved the Pope was disinclined to approve a new one. That is, until several Cardinals told him that he needed approve this order because if "you reject this Rule, you reject the Gospel. The Franciscan family has been called to live a particular and very important aspect of the Gospel. It is a charism that the Church desperately needs.

Furthermore, you seem to be under the impression that Franciscans don’t preach with words. Just because they do not take many parish assignments, doesn’t mean that they are not preaching God’s word to those that they meet everyday.

 

[passer_by]

You seem to be under the impression that Franciscans don’t preach with words.

I think quiet frequently they do not. They seem to lie in wait for people to come to them asking for words while going to people to do works of compassion. As I said before, I feel that the best success is having outreach of compassion and words together.

If the faith or lack of faith of people are left unchallenged, they will never come and ask.

Just because they do not take many parish assignments, doesn’t mean that they are not preaching God’s word to those that they meet everyday. Franciscans can do no better than to follow their Rule to the best of their ability. It is their calling from God, and it is a charism that the Church desperately needs.

I definitely understand this. I think the Franciscans should hold fast to their rule.

I am merely pointing out that the Church on the other hand in this present time needs to use a lot of words. Instead it wants to be “more Franciscan” in its approach. By this approach, what is usually meant is lets show compassion… lots of it… and hope they will seek us out.

 

[iloveangels]

I think quiet frequently they do not. They seem to lie in wait for people to come to them asking for words while going to people to do works of compassion. As I said before, I feel that the best success is having outreach of compassion and words together.

If the faith or lack of faith of people are left unchallenged, they will never come and ask.

I definitely understand this. I think the Franciscans should hold fast to their rule.

I am merely pointing out that the Church on the other hand in this present time needs to use a lot of words. Instead it wants to be “more Franciscan” in its approach. By this approach, what is usually meant is lets show compassion… lots of it… and hope they will seek us out.

The underlying motivation for Franciscans, besides not punching people in the nose, is that the Gospel is first and foremost. Franciscans don’t condone things. That said, we’re not going to wrestle them to the ground and punch them out over it either. That doesn’t solve anything.

Look, as an example: The most evangelical thing on display in most towns is the Nativity scene (where they still allow it). That’s a Franciscan innovation (okay it’s 800 years old, but it WAS a Franciscan innovation). It’s brought countless numbers of people into the church because it speaks loudly and clearly what Christmas is. It helps keep the Gospel alive in countless ugly & busy places because a) it’s beautiful, and b) it’s good, and c) it’s the truth of what happened on that wonderful night.

I’m a convert. A Christmas convert. 26 years ago this year.

 

[jwinch2]

I think quiet frequently they do not. They seem to lie in wait for people to come to them asking for words while going to people to do works of compassion. As I said before, I feel that the best success is having outreach of compassion and words together.

Do you think they have their lips sewed shut when they do these works of compassion?

 

[passer_by]

The underlying motivation for Franciscans, besides not punching people in the nose, is that the Gospel is first and foremost. Franciscans don’t condone things. That said, we’re not going to wrestle them to the ground and punch them out over it either. That doesn’t solve anything.

Look, as an example: The most evangelical thing on display in most towns is the Nativity scene (where they still allow it). That’s a Franciscan innovation (okay it’s 800 years old, but it WAS a Franciscan innovation). It’s brought countless numbers of people into the church because it speaks loudly and clearly what Christmas is. It helps keep the Gospel alive in countless places because a) it’s beautiful, and b) it’s good, and c) it’s the truth of what happened on that wonderful night.

I’m a convert. A Christmas convert. 26 years ago this year.

I think there needs to be made a distinction between what “has been effective” and what can reasonably be more effective.

Now the Nativity scene are all effective means. No one is saying to get rid of those. So that has to be cleared out of the way first.

Second, the idea that the Christmas nativity scene is the most effective way of bringing people in to the church has to be avoided as well. In this day and age, I think its loosing its power more and more as people are actually trying to get it out of the public sphere saying that it is offensive.

So this is where words come in. The time has come where words have to be used to defend the faith. When someone says Jesus didn’t even exist, building more and more nativity scenes aren’t going to convince them he existed. Do you see what I mean?

When one weighs the current situation of the world today and its people using reasonable ideas, I think one cannot deny the need for a massive use of words. i.e. discussions addressing differences in positions. Merely flashing religious imagery and compassion isn’t going to do it. It might do it for some, but to think that it is therefore the most successful way is being unreasonable.

 

[passer_by]

Do you think they have their lips sewed shut when they do these works of compassion?

Unless the other party actively asks, I think they do keep them shut. In fact, in places like the Holy Land, they would rather teach them the Koran with those lips from what I have heard.

 

[jwinch2]

When one weighs the current situation of the world today and its people using reasonable ideas, I think one cannot deny the need for a massive use of words. i.e. discussions addressing differences in positions. Merely flashing religious imagery and compassion isn’t going to do it. It might do it for some, but to think that it is therefore the most successful way is being unreasonable.

I have no issue with this for the Church at large. The Holy Father himself has called repeatedly for engagement on all fronts in the New Evangelization. I think the issue is you saying that Franciscan methods don’t work. They do work, and they work well. They are called by God to evangelize in a specific way through their service to the poor. If God did not wish that, He would not have called so many of them.

Balance is important for the Church in that certain religious spiritualities have more of a focus on preaching the Word made flesh, such as the Dominicans, etc. Thankfully, the number of vocations to the Order of Preachers is steadily going up.

 

[passer_by]

I have no issue with this for the Church at large. The Holy Father himself has called repeatedly for engagement on all fronts in the New Evangelization. I think the issue is you saying that Franciscan methods don’t work. They do work, and they work well. They are called by God to evangelize in a specific way through their service to the poor. If God did not wish that, He would not have called so many of them.

I think we must be careful when we say it “works well”. The correct way to put it would be that the Franciscan ways are effective. But there might be more effective ways and some reasonable analysis of the situation at hand shows that there are.

So this does not necessarily mean that the Franciscans should abandon their rules and go out and disobey. They should keep doing what they are doing since it does draw some people in to the church.

BUT, the church as a whole needs to stop trying to be more Franciscan.

Balance is important for the Church in that certain religious spiritualities have more of a focus on preaching the Word made flesh, such as the Dominicans, etc. Thankfully, the number of vocations to the Order of Preachers is steadily going up.

I certainly agree about the balance. Different times can require different compositions for effectiveness. There might have certainly been a time where Franciscan spirituality was the most effective. But I think it is safe to say that it is not the most effective today.

That is indeed good news that the number of preachers are going up.

 

[iloveangels]

I think there needs to be made a distinction between what “has been effective” and what can reasonably be more effective.

Now the Nativity scene are all effective means. No one is saying to get rid of those. So that has to be cleared out of the way first.

Second, the idea that the Christmas nativity scene is the most effective way of bringing people in to the church has to be avoided as well. In this day and age, I think its loosing its power more and more as people are actually trying to get it out of the public sphere saying that it is offensive.

So this is where words come in. The time has come where words have to be used to defend the faith. When someone says Jesus didn’t even exist, building more and more nativity scenes aren’t going to convince them he existed. Do you see what I mean?

When one weighs the current situation of the world today and its people using reasonable ideas, I think one cannot deny the need for a massive use of words. i.e. discussions addressing differences in positions. Merely flashing religious imagery and compassion isn’t going to do it. It might do it for some, but to think that it is therefore the most successful way is being unreasonable.

Do you really think that people pay any attention to your “massive use of words” unless they are already inclined to listen to you anyway? Who are you? Give God something to do, passer_by!

Franciscans do the things they do because the truth of the matter is that God is always present, and the men and women we meet are our brothers and sisters in the natural order, whatever else they are or do. God loves them too whether they realize it or not. And we can help them to realize it by our actions and our compassion and yes, our plentiful words about God. Do you not know this? Do you think Franciscans walk around not speaking of God, not praying, and not loving God? Perhaps you think they are just engaging in a fancy hobby?

Besides, Franciscans are only one of a half dozen or so major orders in the Church, and all of them have charisms that work side by side. If you don’t like the Franciscan charism, you can always pay attention to another one instead. The Franciscan way speaks to many people, but not all.

 

[jwinch2]

Unless the other party actively asks, I think they do keep them shut. In fact, in places like the Holy Land, they would rather teach them the Koran with those lips from what I have heard.

So let me get this straight. You are actively accusing the Sons of Saint Francis of teaching Islam instead of Christianity?

 

[passer_by]

Do you really think that people pay any attention to your “massive use of words” unless they are already inclined to listen to you anyway? Who are you? Give God something to do, passer_by!

We are called to do God’s work. St. Paul, St. Peter, St. James, they didn’t just sit around just performing miracles and waiting for God. They actively accepted his grace and preached.

I think you framing this issue in the light of perhaps me saying “I lack trust in God”. If I was unable to preach, I trust that God would bring someone capable who would preach. In fact, this is why I said the Franciscans do not need to change ways. They should do what they do. God will use other means.

But if we forcefully try to make the Church become Franciscan, God will still find a way, but we will be making a very unwise decision.

Franciscans do the things they do because the truth of the matter is that God is always present, and the men and women we meet are our brothers and sisters in the natural order, whatever else they are or do. God loves them too whether they realize it or not. And we can help them to realize it by our actions and our compassion and yes, our plentiful words about God. Do you not know this? Do you think Franciscans walk around not speaking of God, not praying, and not loving God? Do you think we have a fancy hobby or what?

Ok I think this part was written due to something upsetting I must have said.

I am merely saying that the Franciscans seem to be more reserved today in a more “If I am not asked, I do not tell” policy. As I said before, in the holy land, it is considered prudent to teach the Koran as a work of charity but imprudent to actively preach the word of God.

What you have to realize is that the Franciscans aren’t the only ones with the works of compassion. Atheists do works of compassion. Protestants do works of compassion. So people can get drawn to them too.

To make matters worse, it requires some good religious foundation to separate false compassion from true compassion. Take Euthanasia for an example. Certain Protestant groups and Atheists might claim that it is compassionate to end a life. So the people would look as the Catholic church which opposes such a thing as bigoted. The only way to change that is to use words and explain why the “compassion” they claim is a false compassion.

Now that cannot be done without using words. If we don’t use words, more and more people just leave the church thinking it is bigoted on issues such as Euthanasia, IVF, Abortion, Contraception, Same sex marriage etc etc.

 

[iloveangels]

It is great news that the number of Dominicans is going up. We need scholars and teachers and great leaders, and the Dominicans are always foremost in those areas.

 

[passer_by]

So let me get this straight. You are actively accusing the Sons of Saint Francis of teaching Islam instead of Christianity?

Oh no no. When you say it that way, it sounds immoral.

On the other hand, they are using it as a means to try and get friendly with the locals and hopefully make the message of Christianity more acceptable and to maybe get them to seek it out. So there is nothing intrinsically immoral about it.

On the other hand, as a matter of judgement and effectiveness, its not that great. Even in a debate, it is a well known psychological idea that the first position taken by a neutral person is usually the one they always cling to and the hardest to eliminate after.

So while it is certainly not immoral, I would say it is imprudent and unwise.

 

[jwinch2]

It is great news that the number of Dominicans is going up. We need scholars and teachers and great leaders, and the Dominicans are always foremost in those areas.

I agree 100%. Not to mention that fact that we are seeing increases in not only the friars but in the active and contemplative sisters as well. This makes me just as happy as the idea of more friars does. More teaching sisters equals more kids exposed to a faithful witness of the faith. More contemplative sisters means more prayers for preachers and the world. We need that desperately.

And just for the purposes of discussion it might be helpful to get an idea of just how high in esteem St. Dominic held St. Francis. I posted this on another thread, but perhaps it would be useful here as well.
Constitution of the Order of Friars Preachers:

We declare that our Priors and Brethren should have a diligent care that they always and everywhere bear, and heartily preserve, a great love to the Friars Minor; let them praise them with their lips, and by their words kindly receive and courteously treat with them; and be solicitous as far as they can to be at peace with them. And if any do contrary let him be gravely punished. And let the Brethren beware lest they ever speak otherwise than well of them, either among themselves or to any of their friends. And if anyone, under the show of friendship, shall report any evil of the aforesaid Friars, our brethren must not be easy in believing it; but rather endeavor as far as possible to excuse them. And if it chance that the Friars Minor shall have provoked us by speaking ill of us, nevertheless let us in nowise publicly content with them.

 

[iloveangels]

We are called to do God’s work. St. Paul, St. Peter, St. James, they didn’t just sit around just performing miracles and waiting for God. They actively accepted his grace and preached.

I think you framing this issue in the light of perhaps me saying “I lack trust in God”. If I was unable to preach, I trust that God would bring someone capable who would preach. In fact, this is why I said the Franciscans do not need to change ways. They should do what they do. God will use other means.

But if we forcefully try to make the Church become Franciscan, God will still find a way, but we will be making a very unwise decision.

Ok I think this part was written due to something upsetting I must have said.

I am merely saying that the Franciscans seem to be more reserved today in a more “If I am not asked, I do not tell” policy. As I said before, in the holy land, it is considered prudent to teach the Koran as a work of charity but imprudent to actively preach the word of God.

What you have to realize is that the Franciscans aren’t the only ones with the works of compassion. Atheists do works of compassion. Protestants do works of compassion. So people can get drawn to them too.

To make matters worse, it requires some good religious foundation to separate false compassion from true compassion. Take Euthanasia for an example. Certain Protestant groups and Atheists might claim that it is compassionate to end a life. So the people would look as the Catholic church which opposes such a thing as bigoted. The only way to change that is to use words and explain why the “compassion” they claim is a false compassion.

Now that cannot be done without using words. If we don’t use words, more and more people just leave the church thinking it is bigoted on issues such as Euthanasia, IVF, Abortion, Contraception, Same sex marriage etc etc.

No one is trying to make the Church wholly Franciscan, not even the Franciscans. The Church has at least 1/2 dozen major rules, all working together with the Holy See and tons of non-religious to live out the Gospel in the present circumstances.

Also necessary to understand when we talk about Franciscans, is this: When they talk about or even perform acts of compassion, they are not translating that word as the world translates that word. The task before Franciscans is the same as it has always been: From Gospel to Life and from Life to the Gospel. That was the goal of St. Francis, and as far as I am aware, it’s still the goal of the Franciscans and always has been. Yes, we have bad apples; every group does, but that doesn’t describe most Franciscans at all. I know what you’re saying, but we are not just “good pagans,” and we don’t encourage anyone else to be a “good pagan” either.

Your example of euthanasia is a good one. Franciscans believe that every single person is important in the eyes of God. Therefore euthanasia is an objective evil. Franciscans don’t believe anything different about that than does the Holy See. I’m not aware that they ever did believe anything different about it than the Holy See.

 

[passer_by]

And just for the purposes of discussion it might be helpful to get an idea of just how high in esteem St. Dominic held St. Francis. I posted this on another thread, but perhaps it would be useful here as well.

Ok I must first, say I am not saying that the Franciscans are evil by any stretch . I hope you realize that I am only discussing their methods. I am not even suggesting that they change their methods either. Their spirituality is just as important in the church. Every spirituality is a treasure of the church. But surely the effectiveness of a method can be compared and analyzed for a given time and place, right?

So all I am saying is that there are other effective methods required for this current time.

 

[passer_by]

No one is trying to make the Church wholly Franciscan, not even the Franciscans. The Church has at least 1/2 dozen major rules, all working together with the Holy See and tons of non-religious to live out the Gospel in the present circumstances.

Also necessary to understand when we talk about Franciscans, is this: When they talk about or even perform acts of compassion, they are not translating that word as the world translates that word. The task before Franciscans is the same as it has always been: From Gospel to Life and from Life to the Gospel. That was the goal of St. Francis, and as far as I am aware, it’s still the goal of the Franciscans and always has been. Yes, we have bad apples; every group does, but that doesn’t describe most Franciscans at all. I know what you’re saying, but we are not just “good pagans,” and we don’t encourage anyone else to be a “good pagan” either.

Your example of euthanasia is a good one. Franciscans believe that every single person is important in the eyes of God. Therefore euthanasia is an objective evil. Franciscans don’t believe anything different about that than does the Holy See. I’m not aware that they ever did believe anything different about it than the Holy See.

I think I might have lead you to believe that I was saying some Franciscans condone Euthanasia. I apologize if I came across that way. On the other hand what I meant by that example was the danger in leading people to a faith through compassionate acts.

In our current times, the understanding of many, even Catholics on what it means to be compassionate is rather distorted. For some, allowing same sex marriage is a sign of compassion. Allowing pre-marital sex, IVF, divorce are signs of compassion. In fact, I would go so far to say that the major reason why many leave the church today is that they feel the church is not compassionate enough simply because they do not allow these things. For some, it is a sign that the “Church is out of touch”.

So in times like these, merely doing acts of compassion does not help. There are many secular organizations that claim to do “compassionate” works including providing contraceptives and abortion to 3rd world countries.

What is needed now is an active discussion and preaching on what is true compassion. What is true love. We live in a time where the people just follow “What would Jesus do” and justify almost everything. This is why some Protestant Churches thrive while Catholic Churches are being closed. Of course this conversion from Catholicism to Protestantism is not long lasting because before long the person ends up wanting more concession that even that particular denomination would not give. Then comes the lack of faith.

But in short, we need active teaching in the church and from the church for its members and those it has lost. That is what I meant. I did not mean to say that the Franciscans were doing anything contrary to the faith.

In fact, I think the Franciscan order is one of those orders that are highly successful at keeping its members faithful to the Church.

 

[iloveangels]

I agree 100%. Not to mention that fact that we are seeing increases in not only the friars but in the active and contemplative sisters as well. This makes me just as happy as the idea of more friars does. More teaching sisters equals more kids exposed to a faithful witness of the faith. More contemplative sisters means more prayers for preachers and the world. We need that desperately.

And just for the purposes of discussion it might be helpful to get an idea of just how high in esteem St. Dominic held St. Francis. I posted this on another thread, but perhaps it would be useful here as well.

Increases in all the branches of the order: That’s excellent!

 

[jwinch2]

Oh no no. When you say it that way, it sounds immoral.

On the other hand, they are using it as a means to try and get friendly with the locals and hopefully make the message of Christianity more acceptable and to maybe get them to seek it out. So there is nothing intrinsically immoral about it.

On the other hand, as a matter of judgement and effectiveness, its not that great. Even in a debate, it is a well known psychological idea that the first position taken by a neutral person is usually the one they always cling to and the hardest to eliminate after.

So while it is certainly not immoral, I would say it is imprudent and unwise.

I would urge you to be a bit cautious here because your writing seems to come across as if you are accusing the Order of Friars Minor of not preaching the Gospel. I am new, but I am trying to be a good Dominican or at least to become one, this is incredibly important to me. As you can see in the quote I supplied above, this compels me to love the sons and daughters of Saint Francis in a special way. Thus, without significant evidence of wrongdoing, I will stand up for them. Even if there were a couple of friars here and there who went a bit around the bend, that is hardly indicative of any sort of problem with the entire order. Taking all of that into consideration I have to respectfully request that you refrain from any further potentially disparaging comments regarding the Franciscan family without strong evidence of wrong doing to support your claims.

Furthermore, I would politely suggest that if you want to talk about the focus and direction of the Church at large, which seems to be your goal then you should start another thread on the subject. In fact, since you are an Orthodox Christian per your profile, I think it would be interesting to have a discussion on the method of evangelization employed by Western Catholics, Eastern Catholics, and the Orthodox and related spiritualities. I would be very intrigued by such a thread and would likely participate.

However, this thread is about religious orders specifically, not the mission of the entire Catholic Church.

 

[passer_by]

I would urge you to be a bit cautious here because your writing seems to come across as if you are accusing the Order of Friars Minor of not preaching the Gospel. I am new, but I am trying to be a good Dominican or at least to become one, this is incredibly important to me. As you can see in the quote I supplied above, this compels me to love the sons and daughters of Saint Francis in a special way. Thus, without significant evidence of wrongdoing, I will stand up for them. Even if there were a couple of friars here and there who went a bit around the bend, that is hardly indicative of any sort of problem with the entire order. That is why I am urging caution.

I understand. This is exactly why I stressed that there is nothing immoral being done.

I was merely pointing out that what is being done is merely not the best way of doing things. I am of the understanding that the actions by an order or even a Pope does not necessarily imply that it is the maximally effective action possible. That is why I commented on the effectiveness aspect.

But if you mean whether the teaching of the Koran fact was true, actually I might be wrong. I’ve mentioned it before to Br. JR, but he hasn’t actually denied it but tried to defend it.

Furthermore, I would politely suggest that if you want to talk about the focus and direction of the Church at large, which seems to be your goal then you should start another thread on the subject. In fact, since you are an Orthodox Christian per your profile, I think it would be interesting to have a discussion on the method of evangelization employed by Western Catholics, Eastern Catholics, and the Orthodox and related spiritualities. I would be very intrigued by such a thread and would likely participate.

Actually, I am not Orthodox. I think it was one of the things the forums asked when I signed up and it seemed to actually be on display. I will need to change that

However, this thread is about religious orders specifically, not the mission of the entire Catholic Church.

Understood!

Thank you for being patient and having this discussion nevertheless!