Many. As long as they do not contradict revealed Truth, different perspectives are allowed.
One that comes to my mind immediately is poverty. For a Benedictine, poverty means something different than it does for a Franciscan or a Jesuit. For the Benedictine, poverty is a means to holiness. For the Franciscan and the Jesuit poverty is an expression of holiness. Therefore, it’s an end, not a means. Hence, the concordance between our Jesuit pope and his Franciscan spirituality. They go well together, because the two schools agree on the meaning of poverty. If he were a Benedictine, there would be some difficulty reconciling the two. Benedictines can be very wealthy as a corporate group, but the monks own everything in common. No one owns anything individually.
Speaking of differences, let’s take the LOTH. For the clerk regular, the LOTH is not a communal celebration in the same sense as it is for a monk or a mendicant. The theology is different between the two schools. For all three, the LOTH is the public prayer of the Church and is the highest form of prayer, even over the Rosary, because it’s an extension of the mass. However, for the clerk regular, the public prayer can be prayed individually in private and remain public. For the monk and the friar, it must be prayed with others, because it’s liturgy and liturgy is not private. Praying alone is an exception, not the norm. For clerks regular, it can be the norm. The same is true for diocesan clergy. Praying the LOTH alone is usually the norm.
There are other differences, such a the theology of prayer or the theology on certain sacraments. Again, as long as they do not contradict revealed truth, the differences in emphasis and wording is permitted.
Have to go now. Thanks for letting me chime in.
