Pope Toughens Rules on New Religious Orders

Status
Not open for further replies.
JimR-OCDS said:
I believe the main purpose for the Pope to tighten up on the rule for approving the orders, is to keep safe those who join the order, to only see it dissolved after they dedicated their lives to it.

This isn’t going to happen with a well established order that has Vatican approval.
Click to expand...
The problem is that some “well established orders” became secularized. In recent decades the issue is not so much becoming luxurious or pleasure loving, but loss of fidelity to Catholic doctrine, Evangelical zeal. Some orders’ websites duplicate the secular media priorities.

Still-faithful individuals in now-secularized orders have likely felt abandoned. They, and some who have a new tentative vocation, are harmed by the Vatican’s laxity in relating to well established orders, failing to assure their Catholicism.

The establishment of many new orthodox new orders - most good, a rare few bad - makes the old liberal orders look bad. Instead of dealing with the problem - secularism - the Vatican is looking askance at one of the results, perhaps, one of the solutions.
 
Last edited:
That may be, but more often than not in today’s world, some Catholics see themselves as knowing better than the leaders of the established religious orders, so start their own order.

They recruit people to join them. However, what happens to those members when the order falls apart and they gave 10-20 years to that order, which was not approved by the Vatican?
 
There are problematic new orders but they are the exception.

In my diocese, there are several once large motherhouses or provincial centers. As a rule:

*Liberal on doctrine and politics;
  • No “Evangelism” for decades, except urging people to follow the media social priority; no interest in prolife except to complain that it gets too much attention.
  • Almost no vocations for 50 years;
  • Overwhelming reduction in all kinds of ministries. A tiny handful of working sisters over 65 can’t support what is now mostly a nursing home.
Problems aren’t the exception, they are the rule. The Vatican should deal with the systemic large scale problems first. Then the exception.
 
Last edited:
Nice to know what color the ladder is – green for hope? I’m surprised someone didn’t photoshop it out.
 
Cloisters said:
Nice to know what color the ladder is – green for hope? I’m surprised someone didn’t photoshop it out.
Click to expand...
LOL - I never saw that before in that pic until now!

I’ve seen them use the ladder before (live and online)… they use it to change the candles.

I have to imaging they were in the middle to changing candles when this picture was taken. I have to also imagine that webmaster has never noticed the ladder in this picture, since it almost blends in with the plants!

I just sent them an email letting them know about the Green painter’s ladder. I’ve seen that picture so many times, but never saw the ladder! 😂
 
Last edited:
Don’t you think that the Vatican and the Congregation for Religious is a better judge of this than an anonymous commentator on a blog like this? I thought the policy here was that the acceptability of a community was based upon appropriate approbation, not someone random person’s opinion. I would assume that the “faithfulness” of religious is not up to us to judge.
 
It doesn’t matter what the issue is - someone on this forum will find a way to reframe it as “traditionalism good, Francis bad.”

It gets pretty tiresome.
 
nunsuch said:
I would assume that the “faithfulness” of religious is not up to us to judge.
Click to expand...
True.
I can’t judge judge the personal faithfulness of an individual Religious. That’s private.

But Laity can judge that certain kinds of communities are far less fruitful in terms of public ministry to laity, while other kinds of communities are attracting vocations, and expanding public ministry.

I’m not addressing their internal ministry and dynamics, I’m looking at what they put online and how they present in the public forum, directed at lay Catholics and general public.
 
You can certainly talk about what you find appealing. But to judge if they are “faithful”
Or not seems to go too far and is outside of a mere observer’s capacity to judge. I’m happy to leave that to God, and to appropriate authorities.

I also think it can be dangerous to use quantitative measures to assess qualitative matters, such as faith.
 
Last edited:
Sadly, this is what has happened in my diocese as well.
We have had one or 2 women join one of the orders in the past 5 years and they are dying out quickly.
Most of the sisters in my community are well past retirement age.
Many of them hold very “non-traditional” views, and that is coming from someone who leans closer to the “progressive” side than most people on CAF. I have heard sisters espouse views that were totally anti-Catholic and have seen some of the influence they have had on parishes. It is not at all pretty, and is just another sort of “clericalism”
The idea and practice of religious life will always be an essential part of our faith. I do think that we need to re-examine how this will play out practically in the 21st century and beyond.
 
I have in the past met some of those sisters who seemed to be anti-Church and also often just abrasive people in general. They’re more like angry old boomer activists than sisters. They’re the type who are always demonstrating outside the cathedral in support of women priests. Fortunately, we have some pretty orthodox orders around some parishes, that still wear the modified habit (blouse, uniform skirt or dress, crucifix and veil). IHM Sisters are prevalent around here and still do a lot of school teaching and youth catechesis. They are kind of hurting for younger members. There is one who looks to be in her 50s and is a real powerhouse around the parish and a joy to be around. There’s another order that works in the city with the poor and goes to Mass down there, and they have a lot of young sisters, but they all look to be immigrants from India or the Philippines.
 
Hopefully they can take comfort from the fact that Christ was also falsely accused.

I agree that the reactions of people towards them are disgusting and it makes me glad my ancestors emigrated. It’s one thing to be angry at people who actually committed abuse, quite another to just lump every priest and religious in with the baddies.
 
Last edited:
Give them a few generations and the kids will rebel in the opposite direction. They will rediscover religious practice and when they find it annoys their parents they will be all the more into it. These things go in cycles. It’s unfortunate that religion in Ireland was often so authoritarian based on what I have read. It wasn’t like that in the States.
 
In my diocese there is a new tiny community of women religious, who are Franciscan. They are fully in line with Vatican 2. They are also committed to doctrinal orthodoxy, prolife, and Evangelism. They wear habits.

Within a short distance there are several massive Franciscan motherhouses, some of which turned to other uses, some converted to nursing homes, some still in use as convents but nearly empty.

Why don’t liberal established orders, male or female, get vocations? I think more conservative young people seek out new orders, or go out of town to Traditional orders in other cities.

Liberal young people might applaud a convent or order that moves along the lines of CNN, or the United Way, or the the public school philosophy for instance. But a young adult can do all those things, advocate for the poor, without joining the Franciscan sisters, or the Franciscan Fathers.
 
Last edited:
So let’s say 3 guys get together and they form a Franciscan-styled religious institute that gains Diocesan Right from their bishop and they go for a few years and then they fall apart.

What typically happens to the men and women from such communities? Can they integrate well into another Franciscan family? Or another institute altogether? Have they been poorly formed or maladjusted and so can’t be accepted back into religious life? It seems a real loss to be released from vows at such a point, and going back to the life of a layman.
 
The situation you describe seems to be the one that the Pope is trying to prevent by toughening the rules.

It gets worse the more number of years these 3 guys invest before things fall apart.
 
One reason I stayed on CAF is occasional analysis that connects dots in a way that seems to make sense… pending other data that may come in.

Your post sounds like the ones from Quebec posters about Church decline there.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top