RELIGIOUS BROTHERS: Why don't we promote this way of life?

[JReducation]

I’ve often wondered why this sub-forum never mentions the vocation to the religious life for men. The focus seems to be on the priesthood, both diocesan and in religious life. But we are missing a very important and essential way of life within the Church, the call to be a religious Brother. This omission seems to be more prevalent in the United States than in developing countries.

If we look at the developing nations of the world, they have many new religious communities of Brothers: Missionaries of the Poor, Mother Theresa’s Missionaries of Charity, Little Brothers of Jesus, Brothers of Charity, and Little Brothers of St. Francis. These are just a few of the new religious communities of Brothers that are quickly growing in other nations and are serving the Church by preaching the Gospel through their charity, poverty, obedience, community life and prayer. Their presence makes a difference in the hearts of men and women where ever they serve.

Then there are older communities of Brothers that still impact on the Church in developing nations. Among them are the three branches of the Franciscan Friars, Christian Brothers, Xaverian Brothers and Brothers of the Good Shepherd and there are many others.

The vocation to be a Brother is very unique. It is a call to consecrate one’s entire life to the Gospel and preach the Good News to all people through one’s presence. The religious Brother becomes the living sign of our divine brother, Jesus Christ. Brothers proclaim to the world that God has created us as his sons and daughters and as brothers and sisters of the Incarnate Word. It is a call to live a mystery of love, to live in the daily embrace of the Holy Spirit, inspired by his guidance to serve the world and the Lord in one breadth, to be a Brother to all. It is a call to become a saint by walking down a path that is rarely traversed.

The Brother brings a unique gift to the Church. Usually, he is not a cleric (except for Monks and Mendicants who can be either cleric or lay) and are still religious Brothers. By their community life they proclaim the oneness of the Mystical Body. Through their life of celibacy they proclaim the mystery of the Church whose sole spouse is Jesus Christ and whose sole family are the people of God. The Brother surrenders his natural right to have a biological family to embrace all of us as his family. The Brother’s life of poverty frees him to serve Christ without any considerations for material or human attachments, because he has surrendered those things and persons to be love Christ as exclusively as a husband loves his wife. The Bother’s sanctity brings graces upon graces to the Church.

The mendicant and monastic communities have more canonized religious Brothers than canonized priests. Some were very humble men, others were scholars, some were servants to their brothers and others served the poor. All Brothers are unique. However, they have one thing in common. They are truly consecrated men, recognized by the Church. Contrary to common confusion, they are not men who fell short of intelligence to become priests. They are men whom God called to be his Son’s brothers.

Today, we need men who will be visible witnesses to the brotherhood of man and the Mystical Body in its purest form. With our world in constant crisis, wars and violence erupting all around us call the presence of men who will remind us that we are sons and daughters of the Father, not by their words, but by their life.

Has this way of life lost its meaning for American Catholics? Shouldn’t we promote it to among our young men?

Fraternally,

JR

 

[CarmeliteGirl25]

I’ve often wondered why this sub-forum never mentions the vocation to the religious life for men. The focus seems to be on the priesthood, both diocesan and in religious life. But we are missing a very important and essential way of life within the Church, the call to be a religious Brother. This omission seems to be more prevalent in the United States than in developing countries.

If we look at the developing nations of the world, they have many new religious communities of Brothers: Missionaries of the Poor, Mother Theresa’s Missionaries of Charity, Little Brothers of Jesus, Brothers of Charity, and Little Brothers of St. Francis. These are just a few of the new religious communities of Brothers that are quickly growing in other nations and are serving the Church by preaching the Gospel through their charity, poverty, obedience, community life and prayer. Their presence makes a difference in the hearts of men and women where ever they serve.

Then there are older communities of Brothers that still impact on the Church in developing nations. Among them are the three branches of the Franciscan Friars, Christian Brothers, Xaverian Brothers and Brothers of the Good Shepherd and there are many others.

The vocation to be a Brother is very unique. It is a call to consecrate one’s entire life to the Gospel and preach the Good News to all people through one’s presence. The religious Brother becomes the living sign of our divine brother, Jesus Christ. Brothers proclaim to the world that God has created us as his sons and daughters and as brothers and sisters of the Incarnate Word. It is a call to live a mystery of love, to live in the daily embrace of the Holy Spirit, inspired by his guidance to serve the world and the Lord in one breadth, to be a Brother to all. It is a call to become a saint by walking down a path that is rarely traversed.

The Brother brings a unique gift to the Church. Usually, he is not a cleric (except for Monks and Mendicants who can be either cleric or lay) and are still religious Brothers. By their community life they proclaim the oneness of the Mystical Body. Through their life of celibacy they proclaim the mystery of the Church whose sole spouse is Jesus Christ and whose sole family are the people of God. The Brother surrenders his natural right to have a biological family to embrace all of us as his family. The Brother’s life of poverty frees him to serve Christ without any considerations for material or human attachments, because he has surrendered those things and persons to be love Christ as exclusively as a husband loves his wife. The Bother’s sanctity brings graces upon graces to the Church.

The mendicant and monastic communities have more canonized religious Brothers than canonized priests. Some were very humble men, others were scholars, some were servants to their brothers and others served the poor. All Brothers are unique. However, they have one thing in common. They are truly consecrated men, recognized by the Church. Contrary to common confusion, they are not men who fell short of intelligence to become priests. They are men whom God called to be his Son’s brothers.

Today, we need men who will be visible witnesses to the brotherhood of man and the Mystical Body in its purest form. With our world in constant crisis, wars and violence erupting all around us call the presence of men who will remind us that we are sons and daughters of the Father, not by their words, but by their life.

Has this way of life lost its meaning for American Catholics? Shouldn’t we promote it to among our young men?

Fraternally,

JR

Very nice note, JR. Thank you for your inspiring words. It is true that many people don’t remember that Brothers are an integral part of the religious family. Just because they are men who aren’t priests doesn’t make them any less of God’s people. They are men who are called to live a life of service to God and His people, just like priests and sisters. The sad part is that I have only met one Brother in my lifetime. He used to work at my former parish as a Religious Education coordinator. I even remember his name–Br. Dominic. I took a class with him as I was preparing for the Sacrament of Confirmation. He helped me pick out my confirmation name–Anne, after the BVM’s mother. She and Joaquim have their feast day on my birthday, so I thought it was a good choice at the time (if I could change it, it would be Therese). But anyhow, they are important, and I believe they do need to be promoted in the Church too. God bless!

 

[JReducation]

Very nice note, JR. Thank you for your inspiring words. It is true that many people don’t remember that Brothers are an integral part of the religious family. Just because they are men who aren’t priests doesn’t make them any less of God’s people. They are men who are called to live a life of service to God and His people, just like priests and sisters. The sad part is that I have only met one Brother in my lifetime. He used to work at my former parish as a Religious Education coordinator. I even remember his name–Br. Dominic. I took a class with him as I was preparing for the Sacrament of Confirmation. He helped me pick out my confirmation name–Anne, after the BVM’s mother. She and Joaquim have their feast day on my birthday, so I thought it was a good choice at the time (if I could change it, it would be Therese). But anyhow, they are important, and I believe they do need to be promoted in the Church too. God bless!

I noticed that you’re a Carmelite. The Carmelites are an order of Brothers, not an order of priests. They have many friars who are priests, but that’s not why they enter Carmel. They enter Carmel to be Brothers of Our Lady of Mt. Carmel.

You can be a priest without being a Brother. People don’t realize that. We often think that the mendicants are orders of priests. In the USA we have done a great disservice to the mendicant orders. We have turned them into orders of priests and have all but ignored their vocation to be religious brothers. I believe it’s part of our “American pragmatism”.

We tend to believe that everyone has to do something specific within the Church and we place a greater value on doing over being. A priest does things for us. A Brother is someone to us. That’s the difference.

I know that our own Franciscan community has discussed this at great length. Finally the Minister General and his council have decided to take the word priest and father out of everything that is Franciscan and replace it all with Brother. The revised Constitution does not mention priesthood. Each chapter of the Constitution is directly related to one chapter of the Rule of St. Francis. St. Francis writes about religious life and religious Brothers.

This is not antagonistic toward priests, but an effort to preserve the vocation of the Brother, because it is essential to religious life. Without the Brother, male religious life loses its purity. It becomes an extension of the priesthood. They are not supposed to be that to each other. Each is a special gift to the Church.

We need to preserve all of God’s gifts to the Church and promote them all equally.

Fraternally,

JR

 

[CarmeliteGirl25]

I noticed that you’re a Carmelite. The Carmelites are an order of Brothers, not an order of priests. They have many friars who are priests, but that’s not why they enter Carmel. They enter Carmel to be Brothers of Our Lady of Mt. Carmel.

You can be a priest without being a Brother. People don’t realize that. We often think that the mendicants are orders of priests. In the USA we have done a great disservice to the mendicant orders. We have turned them into orders of priests and have all but ignored their vocation to be religious brothers. I believe it’s part of our “American pragmatism”.

We tend to believe that everyone has to do something specific within the Church and we place a greater value on doing over being. A priest does things for us. A Brother is someone to us. That’s the difference.

I know that our own Franciscan community has discussed this at great length. Finally the Minister General and his council have decided to take the word priest and father out of everything that is Franciscan and replace it all with Brother. The revised Constitution does not mention priesthood. Each chapter of the Constitution is directly related to one chapter of the Rule of St. Francis. St. Francis writes about religious life and religious Brothers.

This is not antagonistic toward priests, but an effort to preserve the vocation of the Brother, because it is essential to religious life. Without the Brother, male religious life loses its purity. It becomes an extension of the priesthood. They are not supposed to be that to each other. Each is a special gift to the Church.

We need to preserve all of God’s gifts to the Church and promote them all equally.

Fraternally,

JR

Not a Carmelite yet, I’m afraid. I’m still discerning my vocation to the Carmelite sisterhood.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

I think part of the problem is that we have lost what it means to be a brother.

We have kept the identity of monk, that is a brother who lives in a monastic cloister but no one really understands the vocation of a active brother.

As for we Carmelites (of the O.Carm. variety). Yes the official name of our Order is the Order of the Brothers of the Blessed Virgin Mary of Mount Carmel. Having said that, we are not really an Order of Brothers. Yes we are brothers to each other but the clergy state was never to be excluded and unlike the Fransicians (and every other Order I know of) we do not have a founder to look to. St Francis did not wish to be ordained. I believe he only became a deacon at the order of the Pope.

We started out as Hermits on Mount Carmel in the Holy Land and then moved to Europe not long after our founding and became a part of the Mendicant movement. We are friars. We focused on education so many of our numders were ordained.

We are still recovered from the pre-Vatican II times where “only” brothers were sort of treated as second-class members of the order. I think the pendulum has swung very far the other way. Today those who are not on the ordination track (not a large number) still go for the same schooling as those working towards ordination.

 

[JReducation]

I think part of the problem is that we have lost what it means to be a brother.

This is very true, especially in the more developed nations of the world.

We have kept the identity of monk, that is a brother who lives in a monastic cloister but no one really understands the vocation of a active brother.

Even in the developed nations of the west, the monk is rarely mentioned.

our Order is the Order of the Brothers of the Blessed Virgin Mary of Mount Carmel. Having said that, we are not really an Order of Brothers. Yes we are brothers to each other but the clergy state was never to be excluded and unlike the Fransicians (and every other Order I know of) we do not have a founder to look to. St Francis did not wish to be ordained. I believe he only became a deacon at the order of the Pope.

Even among Franciscans, priests were never exluded. But the difference is that those who entered the Franciscan family, even today, enter to be religious Brothers. There is no provision in the rule for clerics. The clerics who joined the order during Francis’ time or those who join the order today and believe they have a call to the priesthood must obtain the blessing of the community. The voice of the community is one of the signs that a man has a vocation to the priesthood.

Even friars who are studying theology, never take it for granted that they will be ordained. It is only after solemn vows that they may request to be ordained and the request can be denied by the community. If the request to be ordained is denied, the religious has already made solemn vows for life. He remains a member of the community until death.

By the way, Francis is no longer venerated as a deacon. Studies by Franciscan scholars reveal there is no historical evidence that he was ever a deacon or that he was not. There is one mention in history of him preaching in Church. But in those days, there were many movements of penitents who had faculties to preach and were lay. So the question of Francis being a deacon is best answered by Franciscan tradition.

In the history of the Franciscan family there is no tradition of permanent deacons, even during Francis’ time. To this day, they are not allowed by the constitutions of the Friars Minor (First Order). The Rule and Constitution of the Secular Franciscans does have a provision for secular permanent deacons, priests, and bishops. The rationale is that too many deacons and priests will change the nature of the Friars Minor from an order of religious brothers to a clerical order.

We are still recovered from the pre-Vatican II times where “only” brothers were sort of treated as second-class members of the order.

This happened in many religious communities. The mindset was that it was practical, because lay brothers would take care of the internal needs of the community and the clerics could be free to minister to the people. This hurt many religious communities that were not meant to be communities of parish priests, because it turned them in just that. When they tried to recover their charism, after Vatican II, many of their members left the community. It was very hard to return to a conventual life after many years of living like the secular clergy.

I think the pendulum has swung very far the other way. Today those who are not on the ordination track (not a large number) still go for the same schooling as those working towards ordination.

Are you agreeing with the swing, disagreeing or making an observation? You lost me here.

Nonetheless, the average Catholic needs to know about the vocation of a religious brother and know that it’s an option. We rarely present that. This is unfortunate for the Church. Religious brothers have done a great deal of good for the spiritual and pastoral life of the Church. If we stop and think of how many men would not have been educated were it not for teaching brothers, the result would be tragic, especially in poorer countries where only those who attended private schools got the benefit of a good education.

The same goes for the sick and senior citizens. Even in the USA, there are millions of people who cannot afford care. Brothers provide this kind of care for free or at an accessible cost and at the same time they bring Christ’s healing presence to the masses.

The evangelical counsels are often obscured by Holy Orders. Many clerical communities live their lives as diocesan priests living in community. The laity does not get the full benefit of seeing the evangelical counsels lived out for their own sake.

In a world where power, wealth and pleasure are the goal of most people, we need men who will bear witness to a life of obedience, poverty and chastity as one that is available and desireable for all, not just for clerics.

I just came back from a solemn profession of vows. The diocesan priest who celebrated the mass sat next to me at the reception. He was very interested in the whole idea of why this Brother who had just made vows, with an STD in Moral Theology and a professor at the diocesan seminary, would not want to be a priest. I explained to him that it was not a case where Brother does not want to be a priest, but where Christ has not called him to be a priest, but has called him to consecrate his life to him. In the end, I’m not sure this diocesan priest understood why not consecrate himself to the Gospel through Holy Orders.

One thing was very obvious. It made an impression on Father. I think that he will have something to think about for a few days, especially because this brother is teaching his future brother priests at the diocesan seminary and is spiritual director to many seminarians.

We have the Brothers of the Poor in our diocese and they are very much loved and admired. Their presence is attracting many young men.

Fraternally,

JR

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Even in the developed nations of the west, the monk is rarely mentioned.

True, but when you mention the word monk just about everyone knows what you are talking about. When you mention brother they either think monk or are confused.

Even among Franciscans, priests were never exluded. But the difference is that those who entered the Franciscan family, even today, enter to be religious Brothers. There is no provision in the rule for clerics. The clerics who joined the order during Francis’ time or those who join the order today and believe they have a call to the priesthood must obtain the blessing of the community. The voice of the community is one of the signs that a man has a vocation to the priesthood.

I can see this. For the most part it is the same here but when one joins the community with no feeling of a call for the priesthood should their educational foramtion be the same as those who feel a call to the priesthood?

Even friars who are studying theology, never take it for granted that they will be ordained. It is only after solemn vows that they may request to be ordained and the request can be denied by the community. If the request to be ordained is denied, the religious has already made solemn vows for life. He remains a member of the community until death.

Same here. One does not know for sure that they will be ordained until they are called by the Church through their superior. The same goes for the secular priesthood. They do not know they will be ordained until they are called by the Church through their bishop.

The thing is, all of our friars study theology, that is the M.Div…

In the history of the Franciscan family there is no tradition of permanent deacons, even during Francis’ time. To this day, they are not allowed by the constitutions of the Friars Minor (First Order).

Is that the constitutions of the OFM? I am sitting next to a Conventual Franciscan who says that they do have a few permanent deacons.

The rationale is that too many deacons and priests will change the nature of the Friars Minor from an order of religious brothers to a clerical order.

I believe that any order that allows for priests is considered a clerical order. I think there was a change in these designations following Vatican II.

[quot]
Are you agreeing with the swing, disagreeing or making an observation? You lost me here.

Disagreeing with it. They seem to be making a big issue with the fact that formation is to be an individual thing yet the educational formation seems still be one size fits all. Why make a man who feels no call to the priesthood study for an M.Div., a professional masters degree that takes 4 years. Why not allow such a man to get a Masters of Theology (2 years) and then go on to another Masters degree program for where they feel called to work (such a education)? That seems to make more sense to me.

The evangelical counsels are often obscured by Holy Orders. Many clerical communities live their lives as diocesan priests living in community. The laity does not get the full benefit of seeing the evangelical counsels lived out for their own sake.

Yes, we are stuggleing with this right now but I think the swing is moving away from the diocesan model for us, thank God.

 

[JReducation]

For the most part it is the same here but when one joins the community with no feeling of a call for the priesthood should their educational foramtion be the same as those who feel a call to the priesthood?

I don’t believe it’s necessary. Of course that varies with each religious community. In the OFM Cap it is not a requirement. The requirement is an MA in theology or and M.Th. Most of the lay brothers get additional degrees or technical training depending on their vocation and ministry.

Is that the constitutions of the OFM? I am sitting next to a Conventual Franciscan who says that they do have a few permanent deacons.

I am not familiar with the current constitutions of the Friars Minor Conventual. I am familiar with the Constitutions of the Friars Minor Capuchin and Friars Minor Observant. I served on several committees that last time the Friars Minor Capuchin revised their constitution. This was a point of discussion, as the rule does not specifically mention the clerical state, except when speaking about the Liturgy of the Hours. It was decided that the constitution would not dedicate a specific chapter or sub-chap to the clerical state. The only reference is to the law that it is the voice of the community that confirms a vocation to Holy Orders and that men enter the Order to be Brothers.

The term Brother in the Franciscan lexicon is slightly different from that of the O. Carm lexicon. It is understood that all the friars are brothers to each other, but in the chapter on the friars’ life in the Church, there is a great emphasis made on the friars living the call to be religious brothers as were the early friars. That model stresses a life of prayer, penance, community and charity toward all. It does not emphasize the clerical state, nor does it reject it. It simply includes it as one of the gifts that some brothers receive.

The question came up about permanent deacons. At that time the permanent deaconate had just been restored. The answer of the General Chapter was negative. The rationale was to restore and preserve the lay character of the Capuchin Friars. However, there are individual exceptions, most are Eastern rite friars.

I believe that any order that allows for priests is considered a clerical order. I think there was a change in these designations following Vatican II.

The code of 1983 allows for clerics to belong to communities of apostolic life. They are not considered clerical institutes. Therefore, they no longer have to receive a dispensation to elect a lay brother as major superior or to appoint one as Guardian of a friary.

Are you agreeing with the swing, disagreeing or making an observation? You lost me here.

Disagreeing with it. They seem to be making a big issue with the fact that formation is to be an individual thing yet the educational formation seems still be one size fits all. Why make a man who feels no call to the priesthood study for an M.Div., a professional masters degree that takes 4 years. Why not allow such a man to get a Masters of Theology (2 years) and then go on to another Masters degree program for where they feel called to work (such a education)? That seems to make more sense to me.

It’s called obedience.

Yes, we are stuggleing with this right now but I think the swing is moving away from the diocesan model for us, thank God.

The swing is moving away from the parish oriented paradigm for several religious orders, especially the mendicant and monastic orders. This is a good thing.

Most religious founders never intended for their communities to become parish priests. Their intention was to serve in other areas where the secular priests didn’t traditionally serve and to live the common life. Even St. Ignatius did not intend for the Society of Jesus to be a parish oriented society. They were founded as a clerical institute. But the vision was to defend the Church against heresy and to serve in the missions.

The Marianists Brothers, who also have clerics, are an apostolic community. They have to limit the number of Brothers that they ordain to the internal needs of the community, not for the benefit of the diocese.

At the Washington Theological Union the Missionary Servants of the Mot Holy Trinity also requested to have their status changed. They had a Lay Brother as Superior General or Vicar General. I can’t recall.

I believe that the missionary activity to the Americas required the assistance of religious. As a result, many religious communities that were founded as Brotherhoods, in the strict sense of the word, came to the aid of the new Church in the Americas. This created the need for more ordinations and for a relaxation of the conventual life in order to serve the young parishes in the new missions.

Today, the Church calls every religious and secular institute to return to its roots and orginal identity. Not only Franciscans, but many others are struggling to recapture it. It has come at a price. Many priests in non-clerical communities were very used to living as diocesan priests. When the pendulum swung back and the demands of the conventual life was put into effect, many found it difficult to give up being “Father” and return to being Brother or Friar within a community, with a horarium and internal duties and responsibilities. Many left their orders and congregations.

On a forum such as this, it behooves every Catholic who knows about religious orders, congregations, secular institutes, secular orders and lay orders to promote vocations to them equally, so that future generations of men will not have to suffer what those who entered religious life in the 1960s and 70s suffered.

There is enough room and need in the Church for different forms of life and both the lay and clerical states.

Fraternally,

JR