I would say that I wish clergy and religious would never assume that the laity know what they’re talking about. Again, as I’ve said before, you don’t have to infantilize us, but please just be more explicit. That would help a lot. I did not know that phrase was part of a letter from Inego. However, if the Pope had explained that little background bit–yes yes I know he doesn’t “have” to–then it would have been much easier to understand.
I understand your frustration with the situation. I don’t think that inserting a footnote when one is speaking is always the answer either. To stop and explain that this comes from a letter written by St. Ignatius can have one of two negative effects. First, it may distract. Second, secular priests and bishops can resent it. They’re secular men, not consecrated religious. It can come across sounding biased.
There is always the issue of time. If you’re giving a talk, as was this case, you’re on the clock. You have to be very concise. Pope Francis has already taken fire from his staff for going off the script and the schedule.
On the other side, I certain see what you mean. It is important that seculars, lay or clergy, know what’s happening. I founded a large program that covers three counties with more than one million Catholics. It’s pastoral methodology is taken directly from the Franciscan playbook, if there were one. I mean to say that it’s taken from our pastoral tradition. We’ve done ministry in a certain way with a very specific worldview and ecclesiology for 800 years. No matter which branch of the Franciscan order you belong to, Clare and Francis are always your point of reference. The question is always, “How would Clare and Francis do this?”
As the program expanded, I needed lay volunteers. I trained them in the needs of the people whom we serve. Throughout their training I kept insisting that the vision was Franciscan and that without that vision, the ministry would fail. However, I just assumed that any Catholic would be familiar with Francis and Clare of Assisi. They’re two of the most popular saints in Church history and Francis is one of the greatest reformers of Church history, along with St. Dominic. I didn’t go into Franciscan ecclesiology, Franciscan worldview and Franciscan methods in pastoral care.
I soon found that as I handed over centers to the lay volunteers, these centers which had been vibrant when the brothers and I worked them directly, started to lose people. In other words, the program was threatened. After several meetings with the lay volunteers, it became very clear to me that what they knew about St. Francis was very little. They had never read his writings. They had paid a lot of attention to his poverty and simplicity, but never paid much attention to his ecclesiology and world view. They certainly had not paid any attention to his methods in ministry.
They all assumed that because Clare was a cloistered nun, she had nothing to say about the active apostolate. Nothing could be further from the truth when talking about a Franciscan nun. Our cloistered nuns are a different breed. Look at Mother Angelica.
I had to go back and develop an six week training program for our lay volunteers to walk them through the mind of Francis and Clare. Once we did all that, the program picked up. The volunteers understood their mission and how to do it, because now they understood my language. They understood such terms as: unquestioning obedience, detachment from our ideas and opinions, feel with the Church, non-clerical priesthood, fraternal ministry and more.
This experience taught me that those of us who understand these things, have an obligation to teach it to those who do not. In this case, those who watched the talk show where there Franciscans discussed the Holy Father’s talk would have learned what he meant, because the Franciscans broke it down. Those who did not, are lost or at the very least not too clear. There is a lot under that statement. Ignatius meant a great deal. The statement had to be unpacked. The friars spend a good 20 minutes explaining it. This takes me back to the time element. The pope doesn’t have 20 minutes to explain Ignatius. If he does that, his original talk is lost and he would need more time to get back on track. Those who are not Jesuits would be wondering why they were subjected to 20 minutes on Ignatius.
Another point that I have to make in the Holy Father’s defense is what I always say. He’s a 76 year old Jesuit. I’m 63. I know that I speak “Franciscan English”. It comes naturally to me. I never think about it until someone asks, “What does that mean?” This must certainly be the case with a 76 year old Jesuit.-Franciscan. This is where asking questions and trust come into the picture.
