Secular orders are an essential part of the mendicant tradition

[Bookcat]

I must admit that most of this is difficult for me to follow, maybe because I have an over-simplistic understanding. I can understand a call to the Priesthood can be as a parish priest, or as priest and teacher etc. or as a priest within a religious community (cloistered or not). I understand a call to serve as a Religious which can be accompanied by a calling to prayer and contemplation, teaching, nursing etc.

I can understand the laity wanting to support the Church whether it is through dedicating resources to a parish church, missions, Religious Orders etc, plus wanting to lead a Christ-filled life. On this point, I understand that some are able to give more than others, some are attracted to a specific way e.g. the Rule of St Francis to the extent that they wish to apply as much as is possible to their daily lives. But I don’t understand joining to the extent of making vows especially if there is no bar to taking Religious Vows.

It puzzles me as I think that if you are (with God’s help) doing your all and He has not called you to the Priesthood or Religious life, aren’t you where God wants you to be? If you can chose to follow all or most of a Religious Rule, why not just secretly go for it?

But then I am easily confused - I even managed to join the Society of the Little Flower without applying.

I appreciate that this is slightly off topic and will sit out like a sore thumb in the middle of an intelligent and informed discussion, but it is a bit related.

Most do not take religious “vows” though some do take private vows. And while they can live the same charism etc it is important to note that such a profession or even private vows is not as you say “on par with religious vows”. But then again it is not about being “on par”

There are different vocations in the Church. A tertiary vocation (secular) is a vocation within the secular state of life. It is a particular vocation within that state and within the Church.

The Church approves of such and has for centuries. There are many Saints or blesseds who were tertiaries (third order secular members).

 

[Bookcat]

I

And there have been a number

Historical Third Orders Secular:

Secular Franciscan Order
Lay Dominicans
Third Order Secular of the Carmelite Order
Secular Order of Discalced Carmelites
Secular Order of the Most Holy Trinity (Third Order Secular of Most Holy Trinity)
Mercedarian Third Order (Order of the Blessed Virgin Mary of Mercy)
Servite Secular Order (Secular Order of the Servants of Mary)
Secular Augustinians
Secular Augustinian Recollects
Minims Third Order
Praemonstrian Third Order

(and they all still exist)

 

[Marauder]

But I don’t understand joining to the extent of making vows especially if there is no bar to taking Religious Vows.

I think I understand what your question is. If you feel called to become a secular priest, after being admitted in general you agree to follow your bishop and the church employees you at a parish or some other position. Even though you don’t earn a lot. Any money you make goes to you.

If you feel called to religious life after being admitted and make your vows you basically give up everything you own and you join the community. Each community has agreements on what you own vs. what the community owns. The director(s) of the community define what you are allowed to do. In general at this point you profess obedience to your Church and your superiors. Any money you make usually goes to the community. The community is responsible for your health care and your retirement.

If you feel called to a secular Order you do not give up anything specific other then what may be addressed by your charism. You continue to live your “normal” life following the ideals of the Order you join, You continue to work your normal job. Any money you make other then what you feel you are called to donate is still your own. Other then praying for you, formation, spiritual support and normal friendly support the secular order doesn’t provide anything for health care or retirement.

Everything is based on discernment and what you feel called to do.

 

[Avila123]

I think I understand what your question is. If you feel called to become a secular priest, after being admitted in general you agree to follow your bishop and the church employees you at a parish or some other position. Even though you don’t earn a lot. Any money you make goes to you.

If you feel called to religious life after being admitted and make your vows you basically give up everything you own and you join the community. Each community has agreements on what you own vs. what the community owns. The director(s) of the community define what you are allowed to do. In general at this point you profess obedience to your Church and your superiors. Any money you make usually goes to the community. The community is responsible for your health care and your retirement.

If you feel called to a secular Order you do not give up anything specific other then what may be addressed by your charism. You continue to live your “normal” life following the ideals of the Order you join, You continue to work your normal job. Any money you make other then what you feel you are called to donate is still your own. Other then praying for you, formation, spiritual support and normal friendly support the secular order doesn’t provide anything for health care or retirement.

Everything is based on discernment and what you feel called to do.

Thank you that simplifies it for me. I knew I was getting the wrong impression but couldn’t work it out through lack of knowledge. Having used your clear explanation, I have got it straight in my mind.

I think I was invited to join a secular Order a year ago at church - there is a secret group headed by a Franciscan nun who met in the Presbytery regularly and only had access through the church, who or what they are, is not advertised. My recollection is that after being treated with contempt for weeks (they turned up whilst I was in the middle of cleaning), one person decided to pin me into a corner, say what they did (talks, reading books and going on retreats) and bullied me into agreeing to attend the next meeting (without saying when it would be). Thank God, it was never followed through and as we changed the cleaning times, our paths no longer cross. Obviously I am not called to a secular Order (and am happy as it clearly isn’t for me).

 

[Marauder]

Avila123, nothing about the Secular Franciscan Order is secret. If they are running the meetings that way, something is wrong. There may not be publicity about the meetings but everyone should be welcoming and forward about what the group is. Nobody should ever be forcing you to do anything. Something sounds fishy here either the group is doing things they aren’t supposed to do or your impressions of what was happening is off. No matter what if you don’t feel called to it, you aren’t called to it.

 

[KathleenGee]

I started a third order Marist fraternity in my former archdiocese, and we had to have permission by the archbishop to begin. It was established when I left, and is going strong up to today, 24 years later.

I was told to retain my profession with them but to join another third order here. But the locals here want you to renounce your membership from the prior and be free to totally join theirs. Each one I inquired didn’t work out.

I worked in the Italian Capuchin missions. I saw myself Franciscan but had a ‘Mary experience’ there. That was not to blossom until I joined the Marist back then. We didn’t have the priests either so it was hard for people to understand what we were about. those who could understand were greatly blessed, and it focuses on serving the Lord by being hidden, not bringing attention to self, and being faithful to your local bishop.

Lots of people don’t like their bishops, and so that was an issue, even for a few priests when they heard that.

But here, it was impossible to find a new third order. I checked out a Franciscan group and their very first response to me was I was too Marian for them and go to a Marian group. I was in the Legion of Mary but was pretty much formed by the Capuchins in being a lay evangelizer. It was way too structured for me. So I tried out the Franciscans…left abruptly, saw it had changed, but this time they were not open to me returning. Still said I was too Marian.

So I thought I would just form my own institute.

I came across the letter by St. Francis written to all people of the world who are C atholicl and thought I would form an association from his directives in the letter.

then I found out about the Brothers and Sisters of Penance who follow the ancient rule of St. Francis. What I found out about them was their form of penance was very doable and gave me the structure of the cross I did not find in the other secular orders. What is hard for me is daily structured prayer. But their statutes give you alot of flexibility. They are a private association. But the leadership says most inquirers in postulancy drop out becaue they cannot handle the prayer life. I am seeing that I have to follow my lifestyle. Some days I can do the Liturgy of the Hours, other days less, or none at all. Then I switch to the Rosary…and then some days I am too tired to pray vocally and fall asleep. But there in the rule you can offer the day to the Lord, recalling Him throughout it, which I do.

They have had inquirers from this area, but they don’t join. I would like to propagate it and i would work to animate the healthy, wholesome charism I experienced with the Capuchins. My former superior became the regional head of the Secular Franciscans in SE Italy for a number of years after his return from the missions.

But I told him I was being drawn more to the ancient order than the modern one.

I think the secular orders have ended up like local parishes where you are given so many things to do and join, people however, not having time to study the Mass or come to church to pray…in part because the churches are closed. But when you are given so many things to look at, it takes away from living out the gospel. Even becoming soooo involved for social justice can make people angry in time instead of becoming more holy.

So I am one in favor of a simple, self denying way of life that will help me focus on the place God is calling me to serve and manifest Him rather than that which exposes me to frantic, endless activities outside God’s will for me, that ends up leading me to seek human opinion and approval than that of the Holy Spirit…working in tandem with a good spiritual advisor.

I am at the place now beginning to seek a spiritual advisor.

but third orders when done right give you a spriitual structured life that the liturgical year cannot totally fulfill. You get into community life, you begin to meet more people, priests and religious in time, and if you are following the right charism, you help build the life of your own local parish.

 

[Alfonsus]

Kinda almost a month old thread, but I have a question for Brother JR.
It is about the consecrated.

In your description it is said that seculars are those people that not profess the evangelical counsels (vows), while the regulars are those people that profess the evangelical counsels.

This make me wonder, where does the consecrated fall in the picture.
Are vows automatically make a person consecrated, or is it depends on the vow type (solemn, simple, temporary)?

What about consecrated person that not profess vows, such as consecrated virgins?
Are they counted as consecrated laity, consecrated secular, or a whole different states in the life of the Church?

This make me think also about the Daughter of Charity. Although they are not religious, and make only temporary vows for one year, are they consecrated?

 

[JReducation]

Kinda almost a month old thread, but I have a question for Brother JR.
It is about the consecrated.

In your description it is said that seculars are those people that not profess the evangelical counsels (vows), while the regulars are those people that profess the evangelical counsels.

This make me wonder, where does the consecrated fall in the picture.
Are vows automatically make a person consecrated, or is it depends on the vow type (solemn, simple, temporary)?

What about consecrated person that not profess vows, such as consecrated virgins?
Are they counted as consecrated laity, consecrated secular, or a whole different states in the life of the Church?

This make me think also about the Daughter of Charity. Although they are not religious, and make only temporary vows for one year, are they consecrated?

All very good questions and not easy to keep things sorted out. Let’s do one at a time, shall we?

A person who makes vows, public or private, with the permission of the Church, is automatically a consecrated person. In other words, he or she belongs to the consecrated state in life. The vows need not be perpetual. They can be simple.

This takes care of the Daughters of Charity. They are truly consecrated women. They are not women religious.

To be a religious you must fulfill three requirements.

1. You must complete a canonical year of novitiate.
2. The person must eventually make perpetual vows.
3. The person must belong to a community erected by the Church as a religious community. It can be an association of the faithful, but it must be an association for religious.

The Daughters do not go through a novitiate. Vincent de Paul deliberately took out the novitiate for the Daughters and for the Vincentians (Congregation of the Mission). The men are not religious either. He did not want them to be religious, because he wanted them to be free of Church structures.

Consecrated virgins do profess a perpetual vow of virginity. They are consecrated women. They are women religious only if they fulfill the three requirements that I cited above. Otherwise, they are consecrated secular women.

A person can be a consecrated individual, but not be a consecrated religious. All religious are consecrated men or women; but not all consecrated men or women are religious.

To be a religious you must

1. Make public vows
2. Complete a canonical novitiate
3. At the end of the 10th year, in vows, you must make perpetual vows, solemn or simple
4. You must belong to a community acknowledged by the Church. The local bishop is sufficient.

Anyone else in vows or consecrated in any other way is not a religious. He or she remains a secular person, albeit a consecrated secular person. Married people are consecrated people. They make public vows recognized by the Church and these vows are perpetual and solemn. Yet, married people are not religious, because they do not go through a novitiate nor do they belong to an institute of consecrated life. The purpose of their vowed state is the sanctification of the couple. Whereas the purpose of the vowed state of a religious is the sanctification of the individual, his community and the world. It’s not exclusive to one other person.

 

[Bookcat]

Married people are consecrated people. They make public vows recognized by the Church and these vows are perpetual and solemn.

To clarify some - the Church uses the term “consecrated persons” more for those in consecrated life.

Yes one can say those who are baptized are consecrated (the very important consecration! upon which even that of Consecrated Life is built)

And yes those who are married are “consecrated” too by the Sacrament (for their duties…) but they are not making “public vows” as the term is used in the Church – and they are not really referred to as “consecrated persons” (I know the term there above was “people” -but I thought to note this for clarity) -such is a very particular term and is not one used really for those who are married but for those in Consecrated Life. Such is important to note.

 

[JReducation]

To clarify some - the Church uses the term “consecrated persons” more for those in consecrated life.

Yes one can say those who are baptized are consecrated (the very important consecration! upon which even that of Consecrated Life is built)

And yes those who are married are “consecrated” too by the Sacrament (for their duties…) but they are not making “public vows” as the term is used in the Church – and they are not really referred to as “consecrated persons” (I know the term there above was “people” -but I thought to note this for clarity) -such is a very particular term and is not one used really for those who are married but for those in Consecrated Life. Such is important to note.

Actually, I’m going to respectfully disagree here.

1. Marriage vows are always public. There is not such thing as a private marriage vow. Public is a vow that is made before the Church.
2. The vows themselves are a form of consecration to each other.
3. The married person is a consecrated person in the sense that he or she is consecrated to his/her spouse.

I do agree with you that the we usually use the term “consecrated person” to mean religious. That does not mean that it’s correct. It just means that’s the way we do it. It is common knowledge that Catholics don’t know how to use language. We often refer to priests as consecrated men and we know that ordination is not a form of consecration. A consecration is a covenant relationship, which is found in marriage and religious life.

Yes, you are right. We use the terms consecrated, vows, religious to refer to those who belong to institutes of consecrated life. But the term is not exclusive to them. Let’s face it, even the Vatican does not know how to use terms correctly.

Don’t forget the fiasco in Spain when male religious were excluded from the Holy Father’s mass with consecrated religious. I thought there were going to be law suits. That’s how angry some people were. :sad_yes:

 

[Bookcat]

Actually, I’m going to respectfully disagree here.

1. Marriage vows are always public. There is not such thing as a private marriage vow. Public is a vow that is made before the Church.
2. The vows themselves are a form of consecration to each other.
3. The married person is a consecrated person in the sense that he or she is consecrated to his/her spouse.

Yes the “I do” is “public” and even bring the spouses into an ecclesial order - a state of life. But they are not “public vows” (something with a very particular meaning in the Church) nor are they “vows” in the sense of vows of consecrated life or even “private” vows of say in a Secular Order etc. It is important to distinguish much here.

In marriage there is yes a “promise” made --and indeed a* Sacrament *is brought into being. It is easy to for People to get confused on this for people often use terms such as “marriage vows” (to highlight the seriousness of Marriage) but such are referring to a different sort of promise than what is meant by the term “vow” in the Canonical sense.

What though is a “vow”?

As the Catechism notes:

2102 “A* vow *is a deliberate and free promise made to God concerning a possible and better good which must be fulfilled by reason of the virtue of religion,” A vow is an act of devotion in which the Christian dedicates himself to God or promises him some good work. By fulfilling his vows he renders to God what has been promised and consecrated to Him. The Acts of the Apostles shows us St. Paul concerned to fulfill the vows he had made.

See also Canon Law: CIC, can. 1191 § 1.

And a “Public Vow” is something of a very very particular Canonical nature.

See in detail regarding vows here:

vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P4E.HTM

(The terms “perpetual and solemn” too mean something rather particular in Canon Law)

And I do not think the phrase a “form of consecration to each other” is apt really here…

---

And to add a bit regarding canonical vows and consecration:

Both a *private vow *(say of an ordinary lay person) and a public vow involve “consecration” -they both involve indeed the virtue of religion. But a private vow is rather different from a public vow – and many or most who have “private vows” are not members of “consecrated life”. Though there is a further consecration in terms of the private vow.

(and let us always remember that Baptism is the consecration of most fundamental importance…)

 

[JReducation]

Yes the “I do” is “public” and even bring the spouses into an ecclesial order - a state of life. But they are not “public vows” (something with a very particular meaning in the Church) nor are they “vows” in the sense of vows of consecrated life or even “private” vows of say in a Secular Order etc. It is important to distinguish much here.

In marriage there is yes a “promise” made --and indeed a* Sacrament *is brought into being. It is easy to for People to get confused on this for people often use terms such as “marriage vows” (to highlight the seriousness of Marriage) but such are referring to a different sort of promise than what is meant by the term “vow” in the Canonical sense.

What though is a “vow”?

As the Catechism notes:

2102 “A* vow *is a deliberate and free promise made to God concerning a possible and better good which must be fulfilled by reason of the virtue of religion,” A vow is an act of devotion in which the Christian dedicates himself to God or promises him some good work. By fulfilling his vows he renders to God what has been promised and consecrated to Him. The Acts of the Apostles shows us St. Paul concerned to fulfill the vows he had made.

See also Canon Law: CIC, can. 1191 § 1.

And a “Public Vow” is something of a very very particular Canonical nature.

See in detail regarding vows here:

vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P4E.HTM

(The terms “perpetual and solemn” too mean something rather particular in Canon Law)

And I do not think the phrase a “form of consecration to each other” is apt really here…

---

And to add a bit regarding canonical vows and consecration:

Both a *private vow *(say of an ordinary lay person) and a public vow involve “consecration” -they both involve indeed the virtue of religion. But a private vow is rather different from a public vow – and many or most who have “private vows” are not members of “consecrated life”. Though there is a further consecration in terms of the private vow.

(and let us always remember that Baptism is the consecration of most fundamental importance…)

I know all of this. Trust me, I’m very well trained in Canon Law and theology, probably more than I need.

What I’m saying is that the use of these terms in Canon Law is very narrow. Therefore, it leaves out a segment of the population and does not clearly present religious life in a way that the average person can understand it. What the new code did was throw all forms of religious life under consecrated life, consecrated religious and reduce the word vow to those made by religious.

Many major superiors are suggesting that the language be changed so that it is specific to religious life and terms such as consecration and vows be applied to all forms of vows and consecrations.

Anyway, I think we have derailed the thread. Let’s get back where we were before we get into trouble.

 

[Bookcat]

I know all of this. Trust me, I’m very well trained in Canon Law and theology, probably more than I need.

What I’m saying is that the use of these terms in Canon Law is very narrow. Therefore, it leaves out a segment of the population and does not clearly present religious life in a way that the average person can understand it. What the new code did was throw all forms of religious life under consecrated life, consecrated religious and reduce the word vow to those made by religious.

Many major superiors are suggesting that the language be changed so that it is specific to religious life and terms such as consecration and vows be applied to all forms of vows and consecrations.

Anyway, I think we have derailed the thread. Let’s get back where we were before we get into trouble.

Before we do - I will just quickly note (and I mean quickly - more could be discussed of course but not to throw off the thread to much --and I might not cross all my t’s here for I must make haste to be with my family…)

I would not say it reduced the word vow to what those on Consecrated life make it had indeed Private Vows which any Christian can make.

(yes the various forms of consecrated life -or those related to such - could be worked on further as one can always work on things and things can change as new forms arise --on such one can see the documents of Bl. Pope John Paul II et al)

The way the Church uses these terms are important. Such distinctions are important.

I am meaning in particular regarding the trail there into marriage - it is not vowed life - it is not vows as in what “vows” are–it involves yes a* promise *to each other and more over is a sacrament and an ecces. order…but not to be confused with the consecration of the vows or the vows - be it the vows of a religious or private vows.

A married person though can have private vows - but that is other than their marriage.

(Some vows can be a “further consecration” as Christians -say in a secular order where they make such vows- and other vows are offering the particular work -say a vow to go on a Pilgrimage in a fixed way involving the virtue of religion. Any Christian can make a vow -as Paul did. It is a Christian thing one can do)

Marriage is if high importance and over all is the importance of Baptism – the reality of Baptism. We all need to avoid any hint of clericalism what seeks even innocently or unconsciously to apply what is to be applied to the Consecrated or the Clerical State in Life to the Lay State of life. Such can be tempting to us all -due to the greatness of Consecrated Life so admire -and there is much that could be discussed here -where one can see models of the Christian life etc so I do not wish to over make my point.

To each his gifts from God in the Church! The high importance the great reality of Baptism *as Baptism *-as being a Christian - a disciple of Christ - and then the reality of the vocation of the lay person in the world - and the high importance of Marriage and Family in the Church and the world -*as Christian Marriage and Family * is what the Church sets us all upon.

All Christians living in Christ - are saints. And are called to further holiness. Each on his particular path.

---

To bring it back to the subject - some tertiaries I recall make private vows or have the option of doing so – which while not stepping them into a different state of life than what is properly theirs (secular state) -are vows. Such vows are a further consecration and bring the virtue of religion into their commitment -offering Latria to God and adding greater responsibility and merit even.

---

A Blessed Holy Day of the Mother of God!

BC