Poverty for non-religious priests

  • Thread starter Thread starter awatkins69
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

awatkins69

Guest
I’ve been considering the priesthood for a while, and I’m trying to discern which order I’m called to. I’ve been considering the FSSP. However, my understanding is that they do not take a vow of poverty. Do priests who do not take a vow of poverty find it hard to live a life in a spirit of poverty? Thank you.
 
I’ve been considering the priesthood for a while, and I’m trying to discern which order I’m called to. I’ve been considering the FSSP. However, my understanding is that they do not take a vow of poverty.
They don’t take a vow of poverty because they are not a religious institute as defined in canon law, but rather:
*
’ a Clerical Society of Apostolic Life of Pontifical Right, that is, a community of Roman Catholic priests who do not take religious vows, but who work together for a common mission in the world.’*

See: fssp.org.uk/england/pages/about-the-f.s.s.p.php for more information.

Only the members of appropriately constituted orders and congregations take public vows of the kind you mean: it is this which defines them as consecrated religious.
Do priests who do not take a vow of poverty find it hard to live a life in a spirit of poverty? Thank you.
My guess is they find it as hard as other people living a secular existence, but in a fraternity like the FSSP there would be the advantage of living a particular charism, and sometimes a common life with other members. That would no doubt be of great help. But as you say, poverty is a matter of spirit, and not always of material asceticism. Ane even those of us who do take vows find it hard. 😉
 
I think the most comforting thing about taking a vow or making a promise of poverty is that the person is lifted above the dehumanizing contempt many people have for those they believe to be poor.

I noticed this once in a conversation with a Protestant about some “Poor Clares” who have a rural convent near her. She could not understand why they are so poor just because they live without any luxuries (but they have everything they need, as far as I know, and even raise small horses to support their convent.) I tried to explain the concept of religious poverty but got only a blank stare in reply. Then I tried to point out that they are not really “poor” because they have food, shelter, clothing, and a good life. More blank stare and an amused laugh on top of it. She really had absolutely no capacity to understand poverty as a virtue. I became conscious of how blessed even the wealthiest Catholic is in our spiritual lives because we are raised with this concept even if we do not pursue it in our own lives.
 
We have to be careful when speaking about poverty. Whether we’re talking about priests, sisters, brothers, single or married people there are two expressions of poverty.

First, the person has no right to own anything. This is material poverty. This is the kind of poverty that is included in the vow of poverty that religious make. We don’t have a right to own anything. Therefore, anything that we have for our use is not our property. It is the property of the community, the miinistry, the diocese or the universal Church. But no where does is there a title with my name on it.

When I am transferred from one house to another the only thing that I can take with me are literally: my breviary, bible, notebooks, habits, clothing and toiletries. Everything else stays behind for the next friar who comes to live there. The computer that I’m using right now will remain here when I leave. Some of our houses don’t have a computer. Some have a computer, but no internet. In some religious communities, religious ARE ALLOWED to keep a little more than this. But notice the key word is ALLOWED. They don’t have a right. It is something that the constitutions grant them and which these same constitutions, if they were changed tomorrow, can take away or reduce these privileges. Once upon a time, we were allowed to have personal books in my community. Wtih the reform to return to the Franciscan roots, that is no longer the case. All books belong to the house where we live. They remain there when we leave. The same goes for furniture and electronic gadgets: TV, radio, computer and so forth. Even the cell phone belongs to the local house or to the ministry.

Second, there is the virtue of detachment. If you want to read and understand it in its most profound sense I suggest that you read Francis of Assisi and Teresa of Avila. I did my doctoral dissertation on the contemplative and apostolic interaction between Teresian and Franciscan detachment. Detachment has often been described as poverty of spirit.

When I was writing my dissertation I found a problem with this term. The original nuance has been lost. It was originally meant as a spirit of poverty in which one removes all attachments to property (things), places, and people that get in the way of fulfilling the perfection of charity, which can only be fulfilled through either an apostolic life that leads one into contemplation or a contemplative live that drives one to action. That’s why we see Francis moving from the very active life in his early years to becoming a hermit by the end of his life, whereas we see Teresa moving from contemplation to reforming the Carmelite Order (action). This does not mean that contemplation and action cannot co-exist. But that’s not the topic for this thread.

In either case, what they both teach us is the great truth that is found in the Beatitudes, “Blessed are the poor, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven.” One who gives up everything that stands between him and heaven is poor, but he does not get heaven because he is poor. He gets heaven because there are no barriers between him and heaven.

In this sense, whether one makes a vow of poverty, as do religious or whether one is a secular person: deacon, priest, bishop, married, or single. We are all called to remove the barriers between us and heaven. These can be possessions, people, places, ideas, worldview, wishes and aspirations, feelings and emotions, memories and even our history. We set aside any attachment that does not allow us to see God as Teresa saw him and that does not allow us to imitate Christ as Francis did. This is why Teresa and Francis together are wonderful teachers about the true meaning of poverty and its final purpose: to contemplate God and to serve him whom we contemplate.

This is a universal call, not just for members of religious orders or congregations. And it’s not an easy call to respond to. It requires discipline and asceticism. Secular priests, married men and women, secular deacons and bishops are all called to detach from anything, any place, any way of thinking and any person that stands between them and God.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF
 
I’ve been considering the priesthood for a while, and I’m trying to discern which order I’m called to. I’ve been considering the FSSP. However, my understanding is that they do not take a vow of poverty. Do priests who do not take a vow of poverty find it hard to live a life in a spirit of poverty? Thank you.
The Oratory, founded by St. Philip Neri also is an association of priests not bound by vows, and is not very well known.

This, from Wiki:

In Canada, the Oratorians have a house in Toronto, although the original foundation was in Montreal in 1975. The first Oratory in the United States was founded in Rock Hill, South Carolina, in 1934. Other congregations are found in Monterey, California; Pharr, Texas; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Brooklyn, New York; New Brunswick, New Jersey; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; and Sparkill, New York.
 
I’ve been considering the priesthood for a while, and I’m trying to discern which order I’m called to. I’ve been considering the FSSP. However, my understanding is that they do not take a vow of poverty. Do priests who do not take a vow of poverty find it hard to live a life in a spirit of poverty? Thank you.
While the FSSP, like secular clergy, do not take a vow of poverty they are encouraged to practice it in their state in life voluntarily, which is easier for some than others.
Presbyterorum Ordinis 17:
Priests, moreover, are invited to embrace voluntary poverty by which they are more manifestly conformed to Christ and become eager in the sacred ministry. For Christ, though he was rich, became poor on account of us, that by his need we might become rich.(49) And by their example the apostles witnessed that a free gift of God is to be freely given,(50) with the knowledge of how to sustain both abundance and need.(51) A certain common use of goods, similar to the common possession of goods in the history of the primitive Church,(52) furnishes an excellent means of pastoral charity. By living this form of life, priests can laudably reduce to practice that spirit of poverty commended by Christ.
I am also discerning the secular priesthood, and have a love of poverty. It will be harder to practice outside a community than it was in one, but that doesn’t mean that I can’t try to keep it as best I can, and not just once I’m ordained. (Currently I am living in a bit of a situation of involuntary poverty, but even so I have accumulated too much stuff again…).
(And before anyone says anything yes, I acknowledge the teaching of detachment separate from material poverty, but I find it easier to be detached if I have fewer ‘extras’.)
 
(And before anyone says anything yes, I acknowledge the teaching of detachment separate from material poverty, but I find it easier to be detached if I have fewer ‘extras’.)
Actually, detachment and material poverty are not that detached from each other, no pun intended. Just look at the “privileged” men and women who have been canonized. One of their most outstanding virtues has been detachment from material wealth. The most famous among them are: Louis King of France, Elizabeth of Hungary, Thomas More, Catherine of Genoa, Catherine of Siena, Clare of Assisi, and Francis of Assisi. These were all men and women born to wealth and privilege. Not all became religious. But even those who did become religious, the drawing card for them was material poverty.

Then you have the monastic tradition. Even though monasteries are usually quite wealthy, the monks and nuns who live there, are very austere. They have few personal posessions.

Even the monarchs and royalty who have become great saints were men and women who lived very austere lives, even though on the outside they appeared very royal. Elizabeth of Hungary would sacrifice food from her table to give to the poor. Eventually she moved out of her castle to live among the poor as a Secular Franciscan. Louis King of France and Thomas More wore the Franciscan habit under their court clothing. They deprived themselves of many comforts. When they died, they had very few personal posessions. Anything that they owned really benefited their family and the people they served. They made a point to avoide benefiting from their wealth and power. Their private quarters were austere and their personal wealth was practically non-existent. Everything they had was committed to the poor, their family, those who worked for them and their subjects. They had little that they called their own.

Teresa of Avila wrote lengthy essays on the relationship between material poverty and spiritual detachment. She taught that one cannot reach total detachment as long as there is a sense of ownership.

In modern times one person who has access to wealth and comfort is certainly the pope, besides the Queen of England (just kidding). When Pope John Paul II died, his staff went through is belongings and found that he owned nothing except the clothes in his closet. He left no bank accounts, an old car, no stocks, no private home, and no other source of income except the salary that he received as pope, which he donated, mostly to Mother Teresa’s order. John Paul was a secular priest. He could have owned a home, a good car, has stocks, bonds and all that other stuff. He could have worn designer clothes (Pope Benedict XVI does); but John Paul owned nothing worth leaving to anyone.

The point is that those who have become detached have always been materially poor as well.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top