Protestant Franciscans, Augustinians, and Benedictines. Are these guys in denial?

[mercygate]

I’m doubting that protestant monasticism is new. It’s not like these religious orders started last week in the Anglican church, they’ve been around since they split from Rome.

Religious Orders in Anglicanism began in the 19th Century in the wake of the Oxford Movement.

 

[Contarini]

They will certainly be accountable to their vows. Their separate orders and the Holy Mother Church are guided by the Holy Spirit. Their decision to break from their orders (for I just can’t imagen their superior saying, " great idea guys! Strike out on your own, maybe you’ll accomplish something we will never accomplish within".) And consequently breaking from the One, True Catholic church, places them and others in the risk of conveying error.

I would not rule out the possibility that some of these people as individuals were once Catholic, but Anglican (and other Protestant) religious orders are, as mercygate says, of relatively recent origin (no earlier than the 19th century). There were a few German convents for women (no men’s houses as far as I can remember) that became Lutheran at the Reformation, but they were essentially turned into girls’ schools and I believe eventually died out. I do not believe that any current Lutheran religious house goes back to the Middle Ages, and I know that no such body in other Protestant churches does so.

Contrary to a lot of Anglican propaganda, sixteenth century Anglicans were basically Reformed (though definitely on the “high-church” end of the Reformed tradition and displaying some not-so-Reformed tendencies by the end of the century). But that’s another thread!

Edwin

 

[mangy_dog]

They can do as they like.

They’re PROTESTANTS, fer goodnie sake…!!!

That’s what THEY DO…!! Whatever the fnerk they wanna do…!!

You’d expect what? Playing by our rules? They’ve got rules. Theirs.

What’s the problem here…?

I do like the “monopoly” part, though. How very protestantly mercantile.

I haven’t laughed so hard all day!! Your thread is hilarious in a reasonable kind of way. I’m typing and still chuckling. This is too funny, I can’t possibly contribute anything else to this thread

 

[goodcatholicman]

I know many Anglicans who absolutely consider themselves Catholic just not Roman Catholic. There are far more Anglican orders than this (Dominicans, Benedictines, etc).

If they are not “Roman Catholic” they are not Catholic at all. They are Christians certainly but Catholic (or catholic) they are not.

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

Perhaps some of these Protestant Benedictines and others may be inspired by the spirit of their founders to check out the Church that their founders belonged to.

 

[jesusluv]

If they are not “Roman Catholic” they are not Catholic at all. They are Christians certainly but Catholic (or catholic) they are not.

All Anglicans, just like all trinitarian protestants are in fact catholic in the sense of them being baptized members of the body of Christ. They just aren’t in communion with Rome. There is a difference in catholic and Catholic. I don’t see why anyone would say that any validly baptized Christian is not catholic. They wouldn’t be called “seperated brethren” if they weren’t in fact, brethren in the catholic sense.

 

[mercygate]

Perhaps some of these Protestant Benedictines and others may be inspired by the spirit of their founders to check out the Church that their founders belonged to.

The Greyfriars in upstate New York came over in the late 19th Century. Prinknash Abbey in the UK came in recently. I know an community of Episcopal Sisters that is now brinking on the same move . . .

As to being “catholic”, let me assure you that aside from the question of jurisdiction, some of these communities (and individuals as well) live lives that are more Catholic in theology and form than many of their counterparts on this side of the Tiber.

Casting stones at these well-intentioned people is something that draws the spotlight back on our own monastic communities. Not a pretty sight, is it?

 

[THutch04]

I’ve known several people in these Orders. Of course they know who their founders were and that their founders were Catholic. Just because they hold different beliefs doesn’t mean they’re completely ignorant of history or that they hate anything Catholic. Many of these people love the spirituality and the way of life of their Orders, that’s why they discerned to join them. What’s so wrong with non-Catholics desiring to live that way of life. Monastic life is not confined to Christianity let alone Catholicism.

 

[LilyM]

They will certainly be accountable to their vows. Their separate orders and the Holy Mother Church are guided by the Holy Spirit. Their decision to break from their orders (for I just can’t imagen their superior saying, " great idea guys! Strike out on your own, maybe you’ll accomplish something we will never accomplish within".) And consequently breaking from the One, True Catholic church, places them and others in the risk of conveying error. I apologize for sounding convoluted but to me a Franciscan, Augustinian or Benedictine who is also a protestant!!!..is to me like a kickstand on a horse.

And that’s what I mean by invalid.

You’re saying St Francis, St Dominic and St Benedict are infallible now??? Of course they’re not!

As Catholics we don’t have a monopoly on joint elements of Christian heritage that we share with our non-Catholic brothers.

The spiritualities of the pre-Reformation religious orders is one such joint element of Christian heritage. Sure it’s a severely modified form in the case of non-Catholic Benedictines, Franciscans etc. So it is also in the case of CATHOLIC laypersons who are Benedictine Oblates or Secular Carmelites.

And I know St Francis himself converted one of the middle Eastern sultans in his journeys in the Holy Land. I’d make a sizeable bet that he didn’t do this by ignoring said Sultan and lambasting him as a heathen, but rather by building upon the commonalities in their faiths - worship of the One True God, for example, and mutual incredibly strong respect for Jesus Christ.

Our shared Christian heritage is not only open to all Christians but has formed and will form an important source of unity. We should be encouraging more of our non-Catholic brothers to get back to our common roots, even if in an imperfect form.

In any event, as I said we can claim no monopoly on such things. Next you’ll be saying that it’s wrong of Lutherans or Anglicans to have Bishops or churches or read the Bible

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

Is there an identity problem here? Are these guys in denial?

s-s-f.org/

staugustineshouse.org/

I would not be too harsh on these people. I actually think this has the potentia to be a great movement outside Catholic circles. Perhaps the Lord is moving them in ways to richly rediscover the Catholic motions of the Holy Spirit as he leads them back toward the Catholic Church-- in addition to being a kind of mirror from outside the Church to remind ourselves of our own Catholic heritage.

 

[Lepanto]

You’re saying St Francis, St Dominic and St Benedict are infallible now???

Nobody has claimed that.

As Catholics we don’t have a monopoly on joint elements of Christian heritage that we share with our non-Catholic brothers.

This is not a “joint element” of Christian heritage. It is a part of Catholic patrimony and it is being adulterated. We do have a right to be defensive against that.

Sure it’s a severely modified form in the case of non-Catholic Benedictines, Franciscans etc. So it is also in the case of CATHOLIC laypersons who are Benedictine Oblates or Secular Carmelites.

This makes no sense whatsoever and is incorrect history. The “reformers” had monasteries destroyed or appropriated their properties and they tried to dissolve the orders wherever they could.

And I know St Francis himself converted one of the middle Eastern sultans in his journeys in the Holy Land. I’d make a sizeable bet that he didn’t do this by ignoring said Sultan and lambasting him as a heathen, but rather by building upon the commonalities in their faiths - worship of the One True God, for example, and mutual incredibly strong respect for Jesus Christ.

Again, incorrect history. Francis tried to convert “the Soldan of Babylon” when they met in Syria, but he did NOT convert. He was impressed by Francis’ bravery of getting behind hostile Islamic lines (the Soldan had issued a reward to his men of one gold piece for each Christian head they returned) but he did not convert.

Francis, BTW, was completely in support of the crusaders’ attempts to free the Holy Land from the Saracens. If you read the biography of Francis written by his follower St. Bonaventure, you will see that Francis and the Soldan of Babylon certainly did NOT discuss “commonalities in their faiths - worship of the One True God, for example, and mutual incredibly strong respect for Jesus Christ.” Francis saw Soldan as an infidel. Please read the book yourself.

Our shared Christian heritage is not only open to all Christians but has formed and will form an important source of unity.

Then why are we so disunited?

We should be encouraging more of our non-Catholic brothers to get back to our common roots, even if in an imperfect form.

The psuedo-Catholic orders prevent this from happening unless they are working with the intention of reunification. If their modus operandi is simply self-propagation then they are an impediment to reunification.

 

[LilyM]

Nobody has claimed that.

That’s why you said the separate orders were guided by the Holy Spirit and put it right up there with said Spirit’s guidance of the Church as a whole, which is infallible?

This is not a “joint element” of Christian heritage. It is a part of Catholic patrimony and it is being adulterated. We do have a right to be defensive against that.

Really? Something isn’t a joint element of Christian heritage that every Christian community held in common for a MINIMUM of 400 years before the Reformation (in the case of the Franciscan order) and 1,000 years or more in the case of the Benedictines?

Like I said, better stop those fnerking Protestants from building churches and reading Bibles then!

The psuedo-Catholic orders prevent this from happening unless they are working with the intention of reunification. If their modus operandi is simply self-propagation then they are an impediment to reunification.

Says who?

 

[Lepanto]

That’s why you said the separate orders were guided by the Holy Spirit and put it right up there with said Spirit’s guidance of the Church as a whole, which is infallible?

Really? Something isn’t a joint element of Christian heritage that every Christian community held in common for a MINIMUM of 400 years before the Reformation (in the case of the Franciscan order) and 1,000 years or more in the case of the Benedictines?

Like I said, better stop those fnerking Protestants from building churches and reading Bibles then!

Says who?

I don’t mean to be rude…but I really don’t see any logical structure in your arguments, just non sequiturs.

 

[LilyM]

I don’t mean to be rude…but I really don’t see any logical structure in your arguments, just non sequiturs.

Forgive me for any lack of clarity, for one thing I was responding to a post of mangy dog’s as if it were yours. I saw this sentence -

Their separate orders and the Holy Mother Church are guided by the Holy Spirit.

and saw it for what it was - it was putting whatever guidance the HS provides to the different religious orders on the same level as the infallible guidance the HS provides to the Magisterium of the Church. Making the orders and their founders out to be infallible as the Magisterium is.

I simply wished to point out that this ain’t the truth - religious orders as entities don’t have any special guidance or protection from the Holy Spirit. That’s why some flourish and some founder and fail.

As for nonsequiturs what would you call your response here -

lepanto:

LilyM:

Sure it’s a severely modified form in the case of non-Catholic Benedictines, Franciscans etc. So it is also in the case of CATHOLIC laypersons who are Benedictine Oblates or Secular Carmelites.

This makes no sense whatsoever and is incorrect history. The “reformers” had monasteries destroyed or appropriated their properties and they tried to dissolve the orders wherever they could.

I said ABSOLUTELY nothing about the reformers, nor about history! I was merely discussing present-day non-Catholic followers of the spirituality or rule of such saints as Benedict or Francis. You’ve committed a textbook non-sequitur right there.

And my main argument is perfectly logically structured. The Rules of St Benedict and the Augustinians, which were known throughout Christendom for a millenium before the Reformation, and the Rule of St Francis, known for at least four hundred years before the Reformation, are, because of their ancient and venerable pre-Reformation heritage, truly part of the joint Christian patrimony of Catholic and Protestant alike. Just as much so as the custom of building and worshipping in church buildings, or the Bible itself.

Since I presume you wouldn’t deny non-Catholics the right to worship in or build churches, or read Bibles, or claim that these are solely Catholic practices, you can’t deny them the right to follow the rule of St Benedict, St Augustine or St Francis if these appeal to them.

I hope this restatement clarifies things for you.

 

[mercygate]

This is not a “joint element” of Christian heritage. It is a part of Catholic patrimony and it is being adulterated. We do have a right to be defensive against that.

The psuedo-Catholic orders prevent this from happening unless they are working with the intention of reunification. If their modus operandi is simply self-propagation then they are an impediment to reunification.

lepanto, while you are carping at the non-Catholics, who are attempting monastic life in good faith, do you not find it more troubling that so many Orders in the Catholic Church have abandoned their charism in favor of an extremely diluted form of Religious life?

Glass house. Stones.

 

[Lepanto]

lepanto, while you are carping at the non-Catholics, who are attempting monastic life in good faith, do you not find it more troubling that so many Orders in the Catholic Church have abandoned their charism in favor of an extremely diluted form of Religious life?

Glass house. Stones.

If the non-Catholics are attempting “monastic life in good faith”, they would be working towards reunification. As long as that is not an issue for them, and as long as their modus operandi is merely to propagate their own congregations, they are driving a wedge in reunification.

Yes, I have bemoaned authentic Catholic religious who have abandoned their charism (see my posting history if you want), but I have done so in different threads as that would be off topic here. This topic is about Protestants with an apparent identity crisis adulterating the purity of Catholic religious orders. (But I’ll add that the surest way for Catholic religious to abandon their charism is to promote the idea of religious indifferentism. After all, if one can be a good Benedictine yet consider the British Monarch as the head of the church, well why even be Catholic?)

I have no doubt that Pope Innocent III, who approved and sanctioned the founding and the constitutions of the Dominicans and the Franciscans would be horrified by what said Protestants are doing and by Catholics who affirm them. He approved the authentic orders to help rebuild the Catholic Church through true reform, not to drive wedges in the reunification process.

 

[mercygate]

If the non-Catholics are attempting “monastic life in good faith”, they would be working towards reunification. As long as that is not an issue for them, and as long as their modus operandi is merely to propagate their own congregations, they are driving a wedge in reunification.

Yes, I have bemoaned authentic Catholic religious who have abandoned their charism (see my posting history if you want), but I have done so in different threads as that would be off topic here. This topic is about Protestants with an apparent identity crisis adulterating the purity of Catholic religious orders.

I have no doubt that Pope Innocent III, who approved and sanctioned the founding and the constitutions of the Dominicans and the Franciscans would be horrified by what said Protestants are doing and by Catholics who affirm them. He approved the authentic orders to help rebuild the Catholic Church through true reform, not to drive wedges in the reunification process.

Who in an official capacity in the Church sees non-Catholic attempts at monasticism based on Catholic models as a wedge against reunification?

 

[inthecloud]

The I know in the CHN that many protestants who liked or tried monasticism eventualy enden up Catholic. Is a argument towards unity. Most protestant monks and nuns seem to be ecumenicaly minded and recognize their catholic past of their faith.

 

[jesusluv]

Lepanto, you are looking at this solely through Catholic eyes. You must realize that the protestants of today are, for the most part, protestant through no fault of their own. Whatever denomination they grow up in or become part of as an adult has its own view of church history and more to the point, the Roman Catholic Church.

To protestants, the Church strayed from the truth at some point and the reformers “fixed” it. The men who wanted reform at the time around the protestant reformation, did not in any way want to break from Rome. I know Wycliffe, Huss, Luther, etc. didn’t set out to be named heretics and killed for it in the case of Huss, or excommunicated in the case of the other two.

It is because these protestant religious are living a monastic life to grow in the love of God that I have absolutely no problem with it. That is not religious indifferentism on my part in saying that.

Now, could you please tell us how they are adulterating the purity of Catholic religious orders? If they are doing the same thing as their RC counterparts, where is the purity lost? If it revolves around the Eucharist, or lack thereof, they firmly believe in the real presence. I understand the church doesn’t recognize their holy orders as valid, but they don’t see it in the same light.

You almost make it sound like monastic life is an exclusive RC club, when we weren’t even the first to do it. Does that mean we adulterated the purity of another religion’s monastic living?

 

[O.S.Luke]

I have no doubt that Pope Innocent III, who approved and sanctioned the founding and the constitutions of the Dominicans and the Franciscans would be horrified by what said Protestants are doing and by Catholics who affirm them. He approved the authentic orders to help rebuild the Catholic Church through true reform, not to drive wedges in the reunification process.

If Innocent III is in heaven and united with Christ, I have all the doubt in the world that he is horrified about anything, nor worried about minutia like this. The communion of the saints roots for us all, seperated brethren or not.