Missing the Nuns

[brandy_jo]

Hey, Brother, I actually edited my post above while you were answering my previous quesiton. Sorry, but would you please look at it again? One error I made- St. Clare died on August 11.
Peace!

 

[JReducation]

Actually I found in the “Form of LIfe of Clare of Assisi,” the papal document of August 9, 1253 from Pope Innocent that the habit is mentioned. This is the official document that gave the Poor Clares the privilege of holy poverty. St. Clare died 2 days later on August 9, 1253. (Not that I at all want to contradict you, Brother JR- just that I, too, have a great love for St. Clare and Poor Clares and Franciscans in general and thus am interested in the right information being “out there.”)

In Chapter II of the document, paragraph 17, we find: “Young girls who are received into the monastery before the age established by law may have their hair cut all around; and, after putting aside their secular clothes, **let them be clothed in religious garb, as the abess sees fit. ** However, when they reach the age required by law, let them, clothed in the same way as the others, make their profession.”

Further, in language typical of St. Clare, she says in paragraph 24 of the same, “Out of love of the most holy and beloved Child wrapped in poor little swaddling clothes and placed in a manger and of His most holy Mother, I admonish, bed, and encourage my sisters always to wear poor garments.”

St. Clare, pray for us!

Peace to all!

This is correct. This is why we say that they don’t have a habit. The rule mentions religious garb, but does not define what that is and leaves it to the abbess to define. Other communities have very specific descriptions of the habit. For example, St. Teresa of Avila described the habit in her constitutions for the Discalced nuns. Mother Teresa of Calcutta left very specific definition of what constituted the habit of her society, the women are to wear the white sari, made of a certain material (I don’t know what that is called) and the men are not to wear any habit, but they are to dress as the common Indian man. You don’t find these definitions in Clare’s rule. The Holy Father left it up to the abbess, who at that time was Clare. But Clare simply refers to “poor garments”.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[simmania]

Having grown up in Catholic schools, one of the saddest things in reliving some of the experience with my 8 year old is the lack of nuns. When I was a boy in the seventies, our Parish had four priests and a convent full of nuns that taught at the school. Our church now has one priest and no nuns. The large convent now serces as daycare and offices for the parish. Some of my best memories were the nuns at our school in church. Sure there was the one or two that carried a ruler around with them, but the seventies were a time when many nuns shed the typical habit and wore conservative clothes with a simple crucifix hanging around their necks. They were all very carring and loving ladies. If you skinned your knee on the playground, they were the next best thing to Mom, if you needed additional help with your school work they were there to help you. The sisters of our parish were very dear to our family and played such an active role in our lives. They orchestrated many of the fund raisers, planned the fun days, and in some ways we were closer to them then we were the priests. Growing up so close to the nuns I felt as the nuns as well as the priests were reposnsible for teaching us the fundamentals of Catholic doctrine and building our faith.

Every Sunday our church Prays for vocations, and while most of the thoughts turn to the priests as they are few in number, my mind always shoots to the nuns. So many of them touched my life. Nowadays there are so many women doing all of the formerly male jobs just as well and there even is a push for female priests which I can’t see is even a realistic request, the female priest is the nun. May God bless all our sisters and I pray for an increase in this wonderful vocation.

Had a similar case at my old school…though it wasn’t that long ago for me.(it’s only been 5 years) I’ve been in a Catholic school for 9 years (k-8th grade), around k-6th grade we had around 9 nuns and 3 priests there. Starting 7th grade though 3 left and were replaced with regular teachers. At 8th grade most of them left, only 1 nun and 1 priest remained.
About a month ago I revisited the school and there is only 1 priest left there. Quite sad to see them all go away I had such great time learning from them.
What I am confused about is why they all left. I’ve bumped into them once in awhile and every time I asked them, they give the same reply as they did when I was in 7th grade “O don’t worry about that, it’s nothing.”

 

[brandy_jo]

Not to belabor my point, but even if she did not use the word “habit” it does seem pretty clear that our beloved St. Clare did expect that her sisters would not be wearing secular clothes but would be in a religious dress of some kind. I suppose because she did not mention how long the tunic should be or what color or what fabric, etc. that you can argue that she didn’t mention a habit, but at least she is clear about setting aside secular clothes. She also mentions that those in profession should be “clothed the same way as the others.”

Again this is from the “Form of LIfe of Clare of Assisi,” the papal document of August 9, 1253 from Pope Innocent. (The official document that gave the Poor Clares the privilege of holy poverty.) This is the beautfiul document approved 2 days before St. Clare’s death.

In Chapter II of the document we find: “After her hair has been cut all around and her secular clothes set aside, she may be permitted three tunics and a mantle…Let no one receive the veil during the period of probation…” We also find, “Young girls who are received into the monastery before the age established by law may have their hair cut all around; and, after putting aside their secular clothes, let them be clothed in religious garb, as the abess sees fit. However, when they reach the age required by law, let them, clothed in the same way as the others, make their profession.”

To be fair, St. Clare wrote in some flexibility to her rule: “The sisters may also have little mantles for convenience and propriety in serving and working. In fact let the abbess, with discernment, provide them with clothing according to the diversity of persons, places, seasons, and cold climates, as in necessity she shall deem expedient.”

Further, in language typical of St. Clare, she says in this rule, “Out of love of the most holy and beloved Child wrapped in poor little swaddling clothes and placed in a manger and of His most holy Mother, I admonish, beg, and encourage my sisters always to wear poor garments.” This is not some sterile document written by on outsider, it was written by our beloved St. Clare herself. There were previous “forms of life” but this is the one from St. Clare, a little glimpse of her heart regarding her beloved sisters.

This is a very important document! At the start of this document Pope Innocent says, “We, therefore, confirm forever for all of you and all who will succeed you in your monastery, and we ratify by the protection of this document this form of life, the manner of holy unity and of the highest poverty that your blessed Father St. Francis gave you for your observance in word and in writing…”

I am not trying to argue with you, Brother JR, just I think it worth saying that St. Clare did intend her sisters to be dressed uniformly within their monasteries and in religious garb.

Peace to all!

 

[JReducation]

Not to belabor my point, but even if she did not use the word “habit” it does seem pretty clear that our beloved St. Clare did expect that her sisters would not be wearing secular clothes but would be in a religious dress of some kind. I suppose because she did not mention how long the tunic should be or what color or what fabric, etc. that you can argue that she didn’t mention a habit, but at least she is clear about setting aside secular clothes. She also mentions that those in profession should be “clothed the same way as the others.”

Again this is from the “Form of LIfe of Clare of Assisi,” the papal document of August 9, 1253 from Pope Innocent. (The official document that gave the Poor Clares the privilege of holy poverty.) This is the beautfiul document approved 2 days before St. Clare’s death.

In Chapter II of the document we find: “After her hair has been cut all around and her secular clothes set aside, she may be permitted three tunics and a mantle…Let no one receive the veil during the period of probation…” We also find, “Young girls who are received into the monastery before the age established by law may have their hair cut all around; and, after putting aside their secular clothes, let them be clothed in religious garb, as the abess sees fit. However, when they reach the age required by law, let them, clothed in the same way as the others, make their profession.”

To be fair, St. Clare wrote in some flexibility to her rule: “The sisters may also have little mantles for convenience and propriety in serving and working. In fact let the abbess, with discernment, provide them with clothing according to the diversity of persons, places, seasons, and cold climates, as in necessity she shall deem expedient.”

Further, in language typical of St. Clare, she says in this rule, “Out of love of the most holy and beloved Child wrapped in poor little swaddling clothes and placed in a manger and of His most holy Mother, I admonish, beg, and encourage my sisters always to wear poor garments.” This is not some sterile document written by on outsider, it was written by our beloved St. Clare herself. There were previous “forms of life” but this is the one from St. Clare, a little glimpse of her heart regarding her beloved sisters.

This is a very important document! At the start of this document Pope Innocent says, “We, therefore, confirm forever for all of you and all who will succeed you in your monastery, and we ratify by the protection of this document this form of life, the manner of holy unity and of the highest poverty that your blessed Father St. Francis gave you for your observance in word and in writing…”

I am not trying to argue with you, Brother JR, just I think it worth saying that St. Clare did intend her sisters to be dressed uniformly within their monasteries and in religious garb.

Peace to all!

No Franciscan would argue this. The point would be what constitutes a habit. For many people a habit is a long tunic, coif, and veil. This is not what is specified in the rule. The rule is flexible in that it allows the abbess to determine what the habit should be. For example, today we have Poor Clares who wear a blouse and skirt, all of the same color and no veil. We have others who wear a short habit with veil, but the hair is exposed. We have others that wear the traditional Benedictine habit like Mother Angelica wears.

The point is that many people want to lock the sisters into one uniform. This is not what Clare spells out. She deliberately leaves room for customs, climates and other conditions.

This is the same rule as Francis wrote for the friars and our habit. That’s why we don’t have a uniform habit throughout the order.

Both Clare and Francis are very clear that it must be poor and that it has to be different from the secular clothing of the time. But they are also very vague, unlike other communities that have details such as fabric, color, length and details. We don’t have such specific rules.

People will listen to us and think that we’re trying to avoid a habit. What we’re saying is that the layman’s version of the habit is not necessarily what Francis and Clare had in mind. They had in mind some garb that was distinctively religious as opposed to secular, but the details were left to others to decide.

When it comes to sisters and nuns, many laymen have one vision of a habit: coif, veil, long tunic and mantle. That was not the only vision of a habit and not a vision shared by all the founders. For Clare it was what was worn in her time and in Umbria. A coif, tunic and veil were common for all women, because of the culture and climate. But the one worn by the nuns was much more austere and recognizable because of its austerity. Today, newer monasteries of Poor Clares have equally austere clothing, without the coif and veil. I know a group of Poor Clares who wear a habit that is far from austere, but most people like it because they look like nuns. St. Francis and St. Clare would not appreciate it. It’s very expensive to make and very fashionable. Part of the rule for the Franciscans was that our clothing be inexpensive.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[albertziggy]

I believe there are several new phenomenon that took place during the second half of the 20th century. This is the emergence of a middle class. The emergence of the middle class created some new and daunting challenges for the Church, especially in regards to vocations.

(cut)

There is also the daunting novelty of middle class. For religious, the middle class is problematic. With few exceptions, religious generally served the poor. There were orders of preachers and teachers such as the Dominicans and Jesuits who served all the social classes. But most congregations of sisters were founded to serve the poor. The large orders of men, such as the Franciscans, Vincentians, Salesians and others were founded to live and work among the poor. We never lived and served among the wealthy and there was no real middle class prior to WW II. It was very small compared to today.

Many religious communities that served in parishes, be they as priests, brothers or sisters became very disappointed when they found themselves back in the same middle class that they had left behind when they entered. I’m sharing this, because our young men who are entering today ask this. They want a guarrantee that they will not be sent back to the middle class. This is why communities such as the Franciscans of the Renewal are thriving. They live a very traditional Franciscan life among the poor and they can show their candidates that there is no danger of being sent back to the middle classd, because they have legislation that says that they must close any community as soon as the neighborhood begins to prosper and they must leave immediately.

Many of the teaching sisters were founded for the same reason, to teach the poor and the immigrants. When they found themselves in middle class schools, they began to look for other avenues of ministry. This created a great deal of confusion among them and they lost numbers very quickly. Sisters who were dedicated to teaching everyone, did not lose the numbers. But these are very few. One of them is the Dominican Sisters of St. Cecilia. Of course, keeping the habit helped them. They could be among the middle class and be different at the same time.

-(cut)-

There are many challenges to be met. Let’s pray that the Holy Spirit will guide us and show us how to do this.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Hi Br. JR:

I pity the Middle Class. It seems that no one wants to minister to them. What is wrong with this class of society that the religious avoid like the plague? Who is going to stand by them?

albertziggy

 

[magdelaine1173]

Hi Br. JR:

I pity the Middle Class. It seems that no one wants to minister to them. What is wrong with this class of society that the religious avoid like the plague? Who is going to stand by them?

albertziggy

It isnt avoidance of teaching or preaching. Br. JR means ministering to the basic needs, food, water, shelter, clothing, teaching foreigner’s English so they can exist in society and become a member of the middle class! Priests will always hold Mass for the middle class where they are called to be. And Sisters will still be teachers, hospital help and aid, and instruct those who are descerning the monastic life of a nun. If the middle class would centralize itself better so that the clergy weren’t spread so thin throughout the suburbs it would be easier to gather a group of people together to form fraternities of Brothers, monasteries and convents of Sisters, and the people behind the scenes like Br JR, who teach and mentor others and help keep the cogs on the wheels of the chariot called the CC so it doesn’t lose it’s wheels and wreck into the whole flock of sheep in its midst! What a mess that would be!!! :yup:

 

[JReducation]

Hi Br. JR:

I pity the Middle Class. It seems that no one wants to minister to them. What is wrong with this class of society that the religious avoid like the plague? Who is going to stand by them?

albertziggy

I’m sorry, but that sounds so sad when you put it this way.

It’s not that there is anything wrong with this class of society, not much more than any other class. It’s that the majority of active religious communities were founded to serve the materially poor, immigrants, infidels, prisoners and the less fortunate members of society. The middle class does not quite fit that bill.

Some founders were very explicit about this, for example: Mother Teresa. But then, how many middle class people are dying on the street? If they are, then they are not middle class. They may have been at one time.

Founders like St. Francis of Assisi were a little different. He never said that we cannot serve the merchant class (the middle class of his time). However, we were not to live among them, work among them, or be like them. We were to live and work among the poor as one of them.

From about 1900 to about 1980, the argument was made that the poor also included those who are morally and spiritually poor. This justified remaining in suburban and middle class parishes. When the work of Mother Teresa and her brothers and sisters (yes she has brothers too), became known, this stirred up the conscience of most Franciscans. As I said above, a brave group of Capuchins stepped outside to renew the Franciscan family. They became known as the Franciscans of the Renewal. The idea was to return to the life and ministry of the 13th century, working and living among the poor. This triggered an avalanche of renewals and reforms among Franciscans. Middle class parishes were traded in for urban poor parishes. Other parishes were closed and the friars left to live and work among the poor. Friars let the established parishes, schools and other institutions to simply live in poor neighborhoods without any specific ministry. They simply live among the people as one of them, but have no specific ministry.

This raised an important question, “Do we need this many priests?” The answer was clearly, “No we do not, since we no longer have the large numbers of parishes that we once had.” As a result, many groups of Franciscans broke off from the main group to form groups of friars where few or none are ordained. All continue to study philosophy and attain advanced degrees in theology for the benefit of the community and the sanctification of the friars.

Many of these friars, my community included, took on other ministries that diocesan priests cannot run: pregnancy centers, hospice care, abandoned children, AIDS patients, immigrants, substance abusers, prostitutes, youth, and more. At the same time many Franciscan branches and other religious families moved into the area of contemplation. Many are strictly contemplative, such as the Franciscans of the Eternal Word, that you see on EWTN. Others do spiritual ministries that involves retreat work, spiritual direction and spiritual companionship such as the Community of the Lamb, a branch of the Dominican Order.

There are religious orders, that include priests, that still serve the middle class: Dominicans, Carmelites, Augustinians, and Jesuits to name a few.

What we have noticed is that most middle class Catholics are not particularly interested in the spirituality and mission of the religious orders. They really desire the sacraments. You do not need religious for that purpose. Secular priests can meet that need. Secular priests come in two packages. The majority are attached to a diocese and are thus called Diocesan Priests. There are small numbers of them that belong to priestly societies or priestly fraternities such as Fr. Corapi (Society of Our Lady of the Trinity or SOLT, FSSP, SSPX, Maryknoll, Sulpicians, Scholapians, and others). For example, the Dominican Sisters all work among the middle class. They are required to observe poverty, but they are not required to live among the poor.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Dj87]

We should then pray for an increase in Diocesan Priests and Dominican Sisters if we want our communities to return to the way they were in the sixties and seventies?

You are correct JR, the Sisters in our community were Dominicans and the Priests were Diocesan and despite the fact as you say the religious work among the poor and do great things, I also wish the morals and faith of the middle class that has declined in the past forty years, in part due to a lack of these Diocesan Priests and Dominican Sisters, would grow in strength.

All of the religious need our prayers and all of them do wonderful things in the communities they work in. They need our prayers daily. Diocesan Priests, Dominican Sisters, Benedictine Nuns, Franciscan Monks…All of them!

 

[JReducation]

We should then pray for an increase in Diocesan Priests and Dominican Sisters if we want our communities to return to the way they were in the sixties and seventies?

You are correct JR, the Sisters in our community were Dominicans and the Priests were Diocesan and despite the fact as you say the religious work among the poor and do great things, I also wish the morals and faith of the middle class that has declined in the past forty years, in part due to a lack of these Diocesan Priests and Dominican Sisters, would grow in strength.

All of the religious need our prayers and all of them do wonderful things in the communities they work in. They need our prayers daily. Diocesan Priests, Dominican Sisters, Benedictine Nuns, Franciscan Monks…All of them!

BINGO! Now someone has got it right.

We do need men and women to serve the middle class and we should pray for this. What I was trying for was to clarify why you do not see as many religious among the middle classes in suburban America. It’s not because we are bad people or do not love those people too. It’s because Christ revealed to our founders that he wanted us among the materially poor, the elderly, the sick, the immigrant, the prisoner and the more vulnerable members of His Body. We had to leave those middle class communities.

For many, it was very painful. It was so painful, that many religious left their orders and congregations. They had become attached to the communities that they served. Others had become attached to the comforts and middle class lifestyle. The idea of going to a house where they no longer had a car, their own TV or had to get permission to step outside of the hosue was overwhelming to them. They had not experienced this since their days as novices. For many male religious who were also priests, the idea of going to a house that is run by a layman who must be obeyed was shocking. They had not had lay superiors since they were novices. In parishes the pastor is usually the superior of the house. This also caused hardship for many.

For others the idea of living with others was a hardship. Many religious who were priests had been sent to live in missions, by themselves. Eventually, these missions became parishes. They were once missions in the middle of a cornfield, suddently Kansas City sprung up around them (an example). But the lone priest who was a religious in a mission, was now a pastor of an urban parish, living alone doing his own thing. Going back to a religious house where he had to ask for permission to say mass was shocking to him. He had not seen this since novitiate days. All of this return to the basics triggered an exodus among the Baby Boomer Generation of religious men, especially those religious men who were both, religious and priests.

Sisters who were once missionaries out in the wilderness found themselves in the middle of suburban schools. The sisters did not move into the suburbs. The suburbs grew up around them. They had to leave, if they were to be faithful to the original charism and vision of the community. This was especially true of the Sisters of St. Joseph.

These women were founded as diocesan congregations in France for the service of poor girls and the sick. They were not founded to run suburban Catholic schools. When they came to America, they came at the invitation of bishops to start new St. Joseph congregations in their dioceses. These congregations served the poor. After WW II, the poor moved to the cities and the suburbs exploded around the sisters. This created a schism among them. The younger generation of women who entered after Vatican II began to question the dichotomy between the vision of the Jesuits who founded the Sisters of St. Jospeh and the life and work of the sisters in the 20th century.

When the younger sisters (from 1970s forward) moved out of Catholic schools to serve in other areas of education that were at the disposal of the poor, many young women did not join them. They were not the Sisters of St. Joseph that America knew. As Chesterton says, “We often see the end of the story, but rarely the beginning.”

What many people did not know was that those sisters who served in other education ministries among the poor were actually doing what the first Sisters of St. Joseph did in France when they began. Women turned away from what they perceived as the “New Version of the Sisters of St. Joseph.” The New Version was actually a resurrected form of the original mission and vision.

I believe that men are getting over this, but women are having a harder time. Many men are entering the renewed communities that are returning to the original model such as Franciscans and others. Women are moving much more slowly in this regard with few exceptions: Dominican Sisters of St. Cecilia, Dominican Sisters of Mary, Franciscan Sisters of the Renewal, Missionaries of Charity, Poor Clares (who today have more than 20,000 nuns).

I have not checked this out, but the numbers suggest that the Poor Clares are the largest religious order of women today. But they are growing because they are returning to the roots established by St. Clare and St. Francis, smaller autonomous monasteries of nuns that govern themselves, live a life of adoration, poor and without the trappings and distractions of external ministry.

We need both, the religious men and women who serve and live among the poor and the diocesan priest who ministers to the middle class and higher. We also need the Jesuit, Dominican, Franciscan, Benedictine and Holy Cross scholars who run universities.

Pray to the owner of the vineyard to send more laborers, especially to the service of the poor. I say this because the Church has stressed that Catholics must make a preferential option for the poor.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[albertziggy]

I’m sorry, but that sounds so sad when you put it this way.

It’s not that there is anything wrong with this class of society, not much more than any other class. It’s that the majority of active religious communities were founded to serve the materially poor, immigrants, infidels, prisoners and the less fortunate members of society. The middle class does not quite fit that bill.

Some founders were very explicit about this, for example: Mother Teresa. But then, how many middle class people are dying on the street? If they are, then they are not middle class. They may have been at one time.

Founders like St. Francis of Assisi were a little different. He never said that we cannot serve the merchant class (the middle class of his time). However, we were not to live among them, work among them, or be like them. We were to live and work among the poor as one of them.

From about 1900 to about 1980, the argument was made that the poor also included those who are morally and spiritually poor. This justified remaining in suburban and middle class parishes. When the work of Mother Teresa and her brothers and sisters (yes she has brothers too), became known, this stirred up the conscience of most Franciscans. As I said above, a brave group of Capuchins stepped outside to renew the Franciscan family. They became known as the Franciscans of the Renewal. The idea was to return to the life and ministry of the 13th century, working and living among the poor. This triggered an avalanche of renewals and reforms among Franciscans. Middle class parishes were traded in for urban poor parishes. Other parishes were closed and the friars left to live and work among the poor. Friars let the established parishes, schools and other institutions to simply live in poor neighborhoods without any specific ministry. They simply live among the people as one of them, but have no specific ministry.

This raised an important question, “Do we need this many priests?” The answer was clearly, “No we do not, since we no longer have the large numbers of parishes that we once had.” As a result, many groups of Franciscans broke off from the main group to form groups of friars where few or none are ordained. All continue to study philosophy and attain advanced degrees in theology for the benefit of the community and the sanctification of the friars.

Many of these friars, my community included, took on other ministries that diocesan priests cannot run: pregnancy centers, hospice care, abandoned children, AIDS patients, immigrants, substance abusers, prostitutes, youth, and more. At the same time many Franciscan branches and other religious families moved into the area of contemplation. Many are strictly contemplative, such as the Franciscans of the Eternal Word, that you see on EWTN. Others do spiritual ministries that involves retreat work, spiritual direction and spiritual companionship such as the Community of the Lamb, a branch of the Dominican Order.

There are religious orders, that include priests, that still serve the middle class: Dominicans, Carmelites, Augustinians, and Jesuits to name a few.

What we have noticed is that most middle class Catholics are not particularly interested in the spirituality and mission of the religious orders. They really desire the sacraments. You do not need religious for that purpose. Secular priests can meet that need. Secular priests come in two packages. The majority are attached to a diocese and are thus called Diocesan Priests. There are small numbers of them that belong to priestly societies or priestly fraternities such as Fr. Corapi (Society of Our Lady of the Trinity or SOLT, FSSP, SSPX, Maryknoll, Sulpicians, Scholapians, and others). For example, the Dominican Sisters all work among the middle class. They are required to observe poverty, but they are not required to live among the poor.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Thanks Brother JR for your explanation

albertziggy

 

[jimcav]

.Pray to the owner of the vineyard to send more laborers, especially to the service of the poor. I say this because the Church has stressed that Catholics must make a preferential option for the poor.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

I agree for the most part, but I believe that the middle class have become the “spiritually poor”. The poor often have better spritual lives than the middle class.

As we minister to the poor, as we must, we somehow seem to have lost the middle class. They are becoming more secularised nearly by the day. They now live in a world where God has little meaning or impact in there lives and their I Phones and big screen TV’s are now more important than God or Church is. Mindless entertainment has numbed them and taken over their lives. I think the move to the suburbs has hurt our faith community to, but I also believe that the lack of any religious nuns, sisters, priests or brothers in their lives to minister to them has played a big role in this also. I don’t know or have the answers as to how the dwindling numbers of religious can deal with the suburban sprawl and get back into the lives of middle America, but somehow I feel we that they, or we, must come up with a way.

While we save the few, we lose the many…

 

[JReducation]

I agree for the most part, but I believe that the middle class have become the “spiritually poor”. The poor often have better spritual lives than the middle class.

As we minister to the poor, as we must, we somehow seem to have lost the middle class. They are becoming more secularised nearly by the day. They now live in a world where God has little meaning or impact in there lives and their I Phones and big screen TV’s are now more important than God or Church is. Mindless entertainment has numbed them and taken over their lives. I think the move to the suburbs has hurt our faith community to, but I also believe that the lack of any religious nuns, sisters, priests or brothers in their lives to minister to them has played a big role in this also. I don’t know or have the answers as to how the dwindling numbers of religious can deal with the suburban sprawl and get back into the lives of middle America, but somehow I feel we that they, or we, must come up with a way.

While we save the few, we lose the many…

The portrait that you have painted of the middle class is very true and very sad. Unfortunately, we do not have that many religious orders of men or women who are allowed to serve the middle class. It’s a catch 22 situation. You cannot send the religious back into the middle class. The popes have been very firm about this. Pope John Paul II repeated it over and over again. He finally wrote Vita Consacrata in which he states very clearly that the religious must have a preferential option for the poor and must comply with the mission and vision of our founders. Most of them founded us to serve the materially poor.

This leaves the diocesan priests and a few religious congregations that do live among the middle class. They are not enough, especially because the middle class is spread out. In our crounty suburbia can extend for thousands of miles.

In addition, most diocesan priests are very aware that their mission is to run a parish, not to take care of the sick, the lonely, the elderly, the person with AIDS, the person with the unwanted pregnancy and so forth. They do the best they can with the resources they have to keep the parish running. If they took on these other duties, the parish would suffer, so would their personal lives. They are not consecrated religious. They are secular men who are called to serve by administering the sacraments, not by taking on these other ministries. These must be taken on by the laity or by religious congregations and religious orders founded to do this. But these religious are not able to get out there, because the middle class is so spread out.

Even if you ordain more men to serve in middle class parishes, no bishop can order them to take on these other ministries. This is not part of their promise of obedience. The promise of obedience made by secular or diocesan priests is to serve in whatever capacity is normal or ordinary for a secular priest, not one that is out of the ordinary. The secular priests who serve the person with AIDS, the elder, the shut-in or in a group home for youth, do so voluntarilly.

Maybe, if we pray, God will raise up religious famlies to serve the middle class. The problem is that the middle class in the USA, Canada, Europe and some parts of South America have communicated to the religiuos that they are only interested in priests, because they want the sacraments. Religious who go into parishes want to promote their charism and spirituality. They want to enage the faithful in their worldview and that of their founders.

I know a group of friars who wanted to get the laity in their parish to open up to the immigrants. Immediately this created a problem. Many of the laity began to complain about having to share their resources with illegal immigrants. The friars are not allowed to discriminate between legal and illegal immigrants. It was a nightmare.

We sent six brothers to a parish. One of the brothers is ordained. The superior is not ordained. Therefore, the parish could not have a pastor. The one ordained brother was appointed as the parrochial vicar. He celebrated the sacraments for the people. The other brothers ran the parish. But people did not want to use the other brothers for spiritual direction, marriage counseling, marriage preparation or as retreat masters. They wanted the ordained brother. There was only one ordained brother. You can’t split him into pieces so that he could be everywhere.

Then there was a problem because the ordained Brother had to leave the confessional at a certaint time. He had to get back for community recreation. People were scandalized. The superior tried to step in and explain to them that the brothers have a monastic schedule that they have to keep. This involves many community activities during the day. But they could call for an appointment for confession, if they did not make the Saturday confession. The parishioners did not like this. Everything that was sacrament was covered by the ordained. Everything that was not sacrament was covered by everyone else.

At one point it became almost comical, because the people did not like calling the ordained, Brother and the non-ordained superior, Father. People are interesting. They get into patterns and they have a tough time breaking out of the box.

The ideal would be more diocesan priests and more religious who can serve the middle class. The middle class Catholic has to yield in his expectations. Diocesan priests are not religious and should not be expected to serve as if they were. Religious have a very special spirituality according to their founder and the laity has to participate in this spirituality or the religious feel as if they have been handcuffed, because they cannot be exteriorly Dominican, Salesian, Vincentian, Trinitarian and so forth.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[jimcav]

I agree JR, it is a catch 22!

I’m guessing that many average Catholics just have not been exposed to the religious orders and don’t really know much about them or how they work. For instance, if you asked the average Catholic what a “brother” is, I’m betting he would answer, “a teacher”. School is likely the only exposure to brothers that he’s had.

I am lucky enough to have a Passionist monastery close by me and I use it regularly, going to confraternity meetings, nights of prayer and for spiritual direction. But in general, the monastery is underutilized. The retreats are hardly ever full anymore and the nights of prayer aren’t either. It’s a beautiful place and a place that I find very relaxing and a place where I can really get close to God in a way that I cannot at my parish. I’m guessing that the middle class area of the city it serves just don’t feel the need for a monastery. Most probably don’t even know what they can offer them. Poor catachesis of the baby-boomers probably plays a role in the lack of knowledge on the religious orders and congregations, but then again, if they aren’t even going to there parish Church for regular Mass, then they certainly won’t see a need to go to a monastery

I think both the religious and the parish priests have an extremely tough job these days. My parish priest is overworked and he has many frustrations with the laity just like you do. He doesn’t even know the vast majority of people that he does wakes for or even there families. Same for weddings. People just come to him when they are in need. But the pews remain only half full on Sundays.

As you say, we can just pray and hope that somehow it all comes together again like it used to be when I was a young man. They were good days to be Catholic! Back then, it seemed like everyone was Catholic. Sunday mornings meant something then and the pews were full with families and there were no shortages of parish priests, therefore the religious could work within there charism too. The future for the faith looked good. I guess we all took it for granted and we thought it would never end, but it has. It seems almost an impossibility to ever see those days again, but then again, nothing is impossible with God…

 

[JReducation]

I agree JR, it is a catch 22!

I’m guessing that many average Catholics just have not been exposed to the religious orders and don’t really know much about them or how they work. For instance, if you asked the average Catholic what a “brother” is, I’m betting he would answer, “a teacher”. School is likely the only exposure to brothers that he’s had.

I am lucky enough to have a Passionist monastery close by me and I use it regularly, going to confraternity meetings, nights of prayer and for spiritual direction. But in general, the monastery is underutilized. The retreats are hardly ever full anymore and the nights of prayer aren’t either. It’s a beautiful place and a place that I find very relaxing and a place where I can really get close to God in a way that I cannot at my parish. I’m guessing that the middle class area of the city it serves just don’t feel the need for a monastery. Most probably don’t even know what they can offer them. Poor catachesis of the baby-boomers probably plays a role in the lack of knowledge on the religious orders and congregations, but then again, if they aren’t even going to there parish Church for regular Mass, then they certainly won’t see a need to go to a monastery

I think both the religious and the parish priests have an extremely tough job these days. My parish priest is overworked and he has many frustrations with the laity just like you do. He doesn’t even know the vast majority of people that he does wakes for or even there families. Same for weddings. People just come to him when they are in need. But the pews remain only half full on Sundays.

As you say, we can just pray and hope that somehow it all comes together again like it used to be when I was a young man. They were good days to be Catholic! Back then, it seemed like everyone was Catholic. Sunday mornings meant something then and the pews were full with families and there were no shortages of parish priests, therefore the religious could work within there charism too. The future for the faith looked good. I guess we all took it for granted and we thought it would never end, but it has. It seems almost an impossibility to ever see those days again, but then again, nothing is impossible with God…

First, I think your community is blessed to have a Passionist house in their area. Second, I think it’s sad that it’s not exploited to the max. The Passionist spirituality is a beautiful one. I love it very much, because it is near to our own Franciscan spirituality, the love for the passion of the Lord and the identification with the poor and crucified Christ.

Suburbia has been a mixed bag for all faith groups, not just Catholics. There is the material stability that suburbia offers, with all of the good schools and safe neighborhoods. But I wonder if too much security and comfort has not made people indifferent to the higher things in life. One can get too comfortable with the temporal and forget that temporal means finite. It will not last and you can’t take it with you, whereas God is eternal and his love will never fade. It will only become more intense.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[wina]

LOL, Sorry folks. I had to do that play on you people. It’s funny, because most people do not remember the rest of religious when they speak about them or pray for them.

…
WOMEN RELIGIOUS: All live in sorority. Title of address is Sister in the Roman Church or Mother in the Orthodox Churches

Hermit: live alone, consecrated, may belong to an order or be a diocesan hermit

Nun: enclosed, makes solemn vows, belongs to a religious order (i.e. Poor Clares, Caremilite Nuns, Dominican Nuns, Benedictine Nuns, Trappistine Nuns, Augustinian Nuns). Note: Poor Clares are not connected with the Franciscan men. Francis founded them to be completely autonomous. They have their own rule of life written for them alone… They are the only order of nuns who have the privilege of autonomy and their own rule. They answer only to the abbess and the local bishop. There is no superior general and Franciscan men may not have any affairs with them.

Sister: active, not enclose, makes simple vows, belongs to a congregation or society (i.e. Franciscan Sisters, Caremelite Sisters, Dominican Sisters, Benedictine Sisters, Augustinian Sisters, Sisters of St. Joseph, Sisters of Mercy, Missionaries of Charity, Daughters of Charity)

MALE RELIGIOUS: All live in brotherhoods. Title of address varies with each institute.

Hermit: live alone, consecrated, may belong to an order or be a diocesan hermit, may be ordained with the superior’s permission, ordination not necessary (i.e. Carthusians). Proper title depends on their tradition.

Monk: enclosed, makes solemn vows, belongs to an order, may be ordained with the abbots permission, ordination not necessary (Benedictine family). Proper title depends on the monastery.

Friar: semi-enclosed, makes solemn vows and belongs to an order or makes simple vows and belongs to a congregation, may be ordained with the superior’s permission, ordination not necessary (Franciscans, Carmelites, Augustinians, Dominicans, Trinitarians). Proper titles are one of the following: Friar, Brother, Frater, Fra.

Lay Brother: active, makes simple vows, belongs to a congregation (Christian Brothers, Xaverians, Marianists, Marians, Marists, Good Shepherd). May be ordained with the permission of the General Council. Proper title is Brother or Father if allowed by the congregation.

Clerk Regular: active, makes simple vows, belongs to a congregation of clerics, society of clerics, apostolic society of clerics (Salesians, Vincentians, SOLT, Redemptorists, Fathers of Mercy, Divine Word). Most are ordained. Proper title is Father unless they are not ordained, then they are Brother. Jesuits are Clerks Regular, but they are the only ones who are allowed to make solemn vows and are completely exempt of any form of Church government, except for the pope.

Secular Orders members of an actual order, not an association or a secular institute

**Francsican: ** married, single, ordained (i.e. live separately, fucntion as a community, follow the same rule of life written just for them by St. Francis, have a superior general, answer only to the pope, not dependent or governed by the friars, nuns or sisters of the Franciscan family. In other words, Francis founded them to be completely autonomous.)

Carmelite: married, single, ordained (i.e. live separately, function as a community, follow the rule of the Carmelite Order, depend on the friars of the Carmelite order, do not have a superior general, but have their own form of government under the guidance of the Carmelite Friars)

**Dominican: ** same as secular Carmelites

Third Orders: married or single, associate with a religious community, follow the rule and life of a religious community, less structured than a secular order, do not have a superior general, not a canonical order, do not make profession of vows

Societies of Apostolic Life usually made up of secular priests, are not consecrated, do not make vows, do not have a rule of life, governed by statutes that they can change democratically (i.e. SSPX, FSSP, Institute of Christ the King, Maryknoll, Sulpicians, Trinitarians (Fr. Corapi’s)

Oblates: usually attached to one of the monasteries in the Benedictine family. Each monastery is autonomous. Married, single or ordained. Do not make vows. Live according to the Spirit of St. Benedict. Do not have a rule of their own. Do not have superiors general. Do not have canonical status as a group. Each oblate makes a gift of himself.

Our dear sisters fall into the group of Women Religious or Consecrated Life, but not into the group properly known as nuns. Even the vows have different obligations and rights from those of nuns. Most sisters were foiunded to be very active. To avoid having to succumb to the rules of nuns, the founders deliberately created them without a rule of life. That’s why they do not use the title “order”. Order means that one’s life is ordained by a rule. They came to be called congregations, meaning to gather together. That’s how they came to be free to live in apartments and other dwellings, if they choose to do so, as long as they form communities or congregate as a sisterhood. It’s up to them to decide where and how they live. There is no universal rule for sisters. There are customs that have prevailed for centuries, but these were never legally binding. The same applies to congregations of lay brothers. Sisters and lay brothers are counterparts. These are not the same lay brothers that you find among the monks and friars. The lay brothers among the monks and friars are properly monks or friars.

Hope this helps.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Wow, I missed all threads about vocations. Just log in again

 

[wina]

I worry that the lay faithful may not appreciate the value of a religious life for men where the men do not do parish work, but live among the poor, spend time alone or together in community prayer and community activities. This causes me worry because it makes me wonder if our faithful Catholic have become product oriented, meaning focused on the productivity of the religious instead of the quality of the spiritual life of the religious, which is really how religious men serve the Church.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

That’s what I’ve been thinking even including people who become catholics in my country. I always say to my aunt who is cathechist, told her that it’s better we have less qualified catholics than have more catholics but don’t know about their catholic faith.

 

[JReducation]

That’s what I’ve been thinking even including people who become catholics in my country. I always say to my aunt who is cathechist, told her that it’s better we have less qualified catholics than have more catholics but don’t know about their catholic faith.

It would be good to have the larger number of Catholics who know their faith. It would also be good to have more Catholics who want to be saints.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[jimcav]

First, I think your community is blessed to have a Passionist house in their area. Second, I think it’s sad that it’s not exploited to the max. The Passionist spirituality is a beautiful one. I love it very much, because it is near to our own Franciscan spirituality, the love for the passion of the Lord and the identification with the poor and crucified Christ.

Yes, I certainly feel blessed to have this monastery so close to my house. It, and the priests and brothers there, have changed my life. They have brought a spirituality to me that I never would have gained without them.

Suburbia has been a mixed bag for all faith groups, not just Catholics. There is the material stability that suburbia offers, with all of the good schools and safe neighborhoods. But I wonder if too much security and comfort has not made people indifferent to the higher things in life. One can get too comfortable with the temporal and forget that temporal means finite. It will not last and you can’t take it with you, whereas God is eternal and his love will never fade. It will only become more intense.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

I think you have hit on something important when you mention material stability. That could very well be one of the biggest reasons that people do not go to Church anymore - they are materially rich, and that seems to be what’s most important in society today. We have come to a point where the average middle class guy, and even some poor, can have all the toys society has to offer. People are so busy with all of the toys they are able to own and it takes up just so much of there time. It is rare indeed to see somebody on a subway, in a waiting room, or in a park that isn’t continually fiddling with something electronic in there hand and in there ear. I get nuts just watching them! And add to this, the big house in the burbs, a nice car and all that comes with that.

So really, there is no struggle left. There is no wanting. We are no longer hungry. We have made it. But has all of this been good to us? I don’t think so. As you said, it has made people indifferent. It has numbed us. We have so much that we no longer have to pray to God to help us as we struggle, because we are no longer struggling and we no longer have to thank Him, since everyone we know has so much, it just seems so normal.

I pray that this country get’s back to living a simpler life, one with less of the distractions we seem to be holding so dear. It would help bring us back to the true life that God wants us all to have…

 

[JReducation]

Along with the fact that religious communities and diocesan seminaries have made some serious mistakes, there is also a reality that the lay Catholic does not seem to want to face. The Catholic parent has allowed his young to be numbed. When the young have cars, TVs in their rooms, two computers per child (desktop and laptop), and every electronic gadget that can be found, they don’t have time for the world around them. It’s absolutely incredible to look at the itinerary of a young person today. It’s as busy as that of any adult executive. I once challenged a group of parents to take a pad and write down their teen’s activities for one week and compare it to their own activities. Those who participated were truly amazed at how much their young crammed into one week, between texting friends, computer games, school, sports, personal care and other forms of recreation and entertainment. If you’re that busy, you’ll never notice the needs of the world or hear the voice of God. That certainly reduces the number of men or women entering the priesthood and religious life. I will say this. The young who are walking away from all of this to enter religious life, especially, are very brave.

Allow me to explain why I said “religious life, especially.” The priesthood does not require that a man detach from these things. In fact, the way that most diocesan priests live, they almost need all of these gadgets. They live alone or in rectories. There is no community life in rectories. It’s not supposed to be there, because priests in rectories are secular men. They do not embrace the values and lifestyle of the consecrated religious. Most diocesan priests living with other diocesan priests live as housemates would live.

However, going back to the missing nuns or missing sisters, there is a real problem that lay people must address. Lay people, on this forum, seem resistant to it. There was a time when lay people embraced the disciplines practiced in convents, priories, friaries and monasteries. This will explain why your Passionist house is not being exploited. People truly believed that God would provide. The poorer they were the stronger their faith. Today, the argument of many Catholics for not embracing greater austerity in their life seems to be, “We’re not religious; therefore, we don’t have to observe evangelical poverty.” That argument will carry you as far as the period in the sentence. The evangelical counsels come from Christ’s own life, not from religious life. Religious simply adopted Christ’s life and committed to live it more intensely and in communion with other religious. I have never read that any community of men or women religious has ever starved. God has always provided.

In my own house we have very little income for three of us, no medical insurance, and no renters insurance. We do not own our house, but rent it. Our car is a 1998 car that sounds like it has bronchitis or asthma, because their is a hole in the exhaust and we can’t afford to fix it; but it takes us to the pregnancy centers and to the poor. The one time that it stopped in the middle of the street, a young man who was an auto mechanic, volunteered to fix it for us. We paid $12.00 for the parts. God came through for us.

But the lay faithful have to embark on the same path or they will not get the sisters, priests and brothers that you folks want in your parishes. You will not get them for two reasons. First, you’re not producing them. Second, it is wrong to place religious communities among people who do not bother learning from them the deeper Gospel values, while starving the poor, sick, orphan, unborn child, homeless, immigrant and others who desperately need the coroporal works of mercy that religious offer and that must be offered through real presence, not via air waves.

A better compromise is to place religious and priests on TV, such as EWTN, where they can reach the middle class and upper economic groups, but place the bulk of your religious among the poor who don’t have EWTN. Since the middle classes do have access to EWTN, cars that get them to any retreat center or spiritual center, good schools and hospitals and medical insurance, and they can mobilize to get to a parish of their choice. The poor do not have these advantages, it makes more sense to take the few people that you have and place them where they can do the most good for society and where they can proclaim the coming Kingdom by the way they live.

I visit many parishes, middle class and higher. I go there to promote the Gospel of Life, to recruit volunteers to work in pregnancy centers, raise funds to keep the centers going, teach the people about the lies of abortion, contraception, euthanasia and difference between democracy as a means and democracy as a goal. I come out with a few dollars and a pat on the back, “Keep up the good work, Brother.” Well, DUHHHHHHH, that’s not what we want. We don’t need a pat on the back and $5. Our volunteers are mostly retired women. Forget the middle age males. “They have to work.”

Well, “Helloooooo, you’re not going to get your soul back in your paycheck.” Fr. Frank Pavone once made a statement that was over the top. He was trying to drive home a point. I have to paraphrase it, because I don’t have the written quote. He said that Catholics who are truly committed to the Gospel of Life should leave their jobs and do nothing else, because there is no other issue that is more pressing than the barbaric slaugher of the unborn and the permissive attitude toward the death of the sick and the elderly. But where are these Catholics? In one parish, our brothers were told that they were wrong, because abortion is not the only issue facing society. There was also communion in the hand. There is a problem here. Communion in the hand does not destroy the life of the soul, tolerance of abortion does.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF