I
iloveangels
Guest
Yeah, but you don’t belong to any of them, right?
- Status
J
jwinch2
Guest
Yep, I have. Thanks. I have not looked at any of the materials, but its nice to see some standardization. That is one thing I would like to see the Dominican Laity do. Right now, every province has its own formation program and some chapter moderators kind of pick and choose (to be fair, with permission) from multiple programs.
For the record and in case anyone is interested, I have attached the actual rule of the Dominican Laity in PDF format.
Peace,
B
Bookcat
Guest
I was not saying such per se. I noted that I am not up on all the details of the internal workings …my point was that all the secular third orders fall under the same Canon. CIC 303. Can the manifestation of such be different? sure…no argument…only misunderstandings at timesIt seems like every time the OFS (formerly SFO) is discussed, there is someone who tries to make the claim that they fall under the other branches of the order. An OFS member or Brother JR typically shows up in short order and sets the record straight, but whoever is disagreeing doesn’t seem to get it for whatever reason. On any number of threads here on CAF, one can see this process unfold. I encourage anyone interested to search through them as Brother and others have broken this down in great detail.
However, for the sake of brevity, I will take a stab at answering.
They don’t.
They are different.
Peace of Christ,
I
iloveangels
Guest
Yes, that’s what we’ve been doing too. Unfortunately with the Franciscans there is so much touchy-feely nonsense out there about St. Francis that this is no longer suitable.
St. Francis has been horribly misunderstood by the culture. We are not first eco-farmers, war protesters or birdbath salesmen. FIRST, we are followers of the Gospel just like our Father Francis.
I
iloveangels
Guest
Yes, the manifestations really are that different. The charisms of the earliest big orders–Trinitarians, Franciscans, Dominicans, Carmelites, Servites, etc–come from the lives of the various founders and they are very, very different, although all are orthodox and together they form a living portrait of the faith as lived out.I was not saying such per se. I noted that I am not up on all the details of the internal workings …my point was that all the secular third orders fall under the same Canon. CIC 303. Can the manifestation of such be different? sure…no argument…only misunderstandings at times
And the internal workings are everything when it comes to understanding these orders. The internal workings are how they live out the faith, and create the portrait. See?
You will see, if you look further into this, that there have been no “orders” founded since the Jesuits. Everything after that has some other classification like “congregation,” or “institute” etc. The “orders” proper are very different than these later organizations.
“Orders” are founded, each to paint part of a portrait of the faith lived out in the Church, and together creating that portrait in its entirety. In essence, they demonstrate the livability of the Gospel and serve as anchors for the Church through the ages. Whereas “congregations,” “institutes” and so on are founded to pursue certain apostolates or cultural needs.
B
Bookcat
Guest
Yes of course.
B
Bookcat
Guest
I do.
(professed …and I have also served as the leader of a community as well as a formation director of novices)
J
JReducation
Guest
I believe there are several problems here that are not going to be comprehensible until the individual actually jumps into one of the secular orders with both feet and experience how each of them interprets Canon Law as well as their own constitutions.
I wrote this in another thread. Canon Law is not like the Constitution of the United States. It’s not so rigid that it applies word for word to every given situation. That’s why we need Canon Lawyers. They interpret the intent of the law and they interpret when the law applies, how far it applies and to whom it applies. Canon Law is based on Roman Law, which is far more subjective than English law, which we use in the USA.
In Canon Law, if it says that the speed limit it 45 mph, it means that this is the ideal. I does not mean that no one can ever go above or below. That’s not the way that we do Canon Law. This flexibility is seen very clearly in this whole question about the OFS.
Do they quote the canons in their constitutions? Yes they do. Do they interpret them literally? No they do not. Is their interpretation approved by the Church? Yes it is. Their interpretation is taken up at the General Chapter and like any General Chapter of an order, it must be ratified by the Holy See.
If you look at the new manual on formation and go to the section on Canon Law, it explicitly denies that the OFS is like any other secular order. It also quotes Bl. John Paul’s statement to the general chapter, that they are singular in the Church and there is not set of canons that really applies to them. There are one or two here and another there, but for the most part, the OFS does not fall neatly into the category that the Code of Canon Law refers to as third orders. When the code was written, Pope Paul VI was not thinking about the Franciscans He was thinking globally Most third orders are part of a family, not independent.
The formation manual of the OFS makes this point very emphatically. It states that the friars have no authority over the OFS. Their role is purely pastoral. They have no vote in any matter other than pastoral matters and they cannot overrule the Minister of the Fraternity, the Regional Minister or the Minister General.
It explicitly addresses the chain of command in the order and the friars are not in that chain. It defines “higher moderation”, which is the term that Canon Law uses, to mean spiritual guidance, not juridical authority. It even goes as far as discouraging the Secular Franciscans from looking to the friars for guidance on anything other than pastoral matters and it identifies this attachment to the friars as a problem to be avoided.
The same formation manual clearly expresses that the OFS is not a part of the Franciscan Order, but is its own order. It’s not a Franciscan association, but a real canonical order as it was erected as such by Pope Honorius III and this had never been revoked. It is the only third order that was ever canonically erected as an order.
I wrote this in another thread. Canon Law is not like the Constitution of the United States. It’s not so rigid that it applies word for word to every given situation. That’s why we need Canon Lawyers. They interpret the intent of the law and they interpret when the law applies, how far it applies and to whom it applies. Canon Law is based on Roman Law, which is far more subjective than English law, which we use in the USA.
In Canon Law, if it says that the speed limit it 45 mph, it means that this is the ideal. I does not mean that no one can ever go above or below. That’s not the way that we do Canon Law. This flexibility is seen very clearly in this whole question about the OFS.
Do they quote the canons in their constitutions? Yes they do. Do they interpret them literally? No they do not. Is their interpretation approved by the Church? Yes it is. Their interpretation is taken up at the General Chapter and like any General Chapter of an order, it must be ratified by the Holy See.
If you look at the new manual on formation and go to the section on Canon Law, it explicitly denies that the OFS is like any other secular order. It also quotes Bl. John Paul’s statement to the general chapter, that they are singular in the Church and there is not set of canons that really applies to them. There are one or two here and another there, but for the most part, the OFS does not fall neatly into the category that the Code of Canon Law refers to as third orders. When the code was written, Pope Paul VI was not thinking about the Franciscans He was thinking globally Most third orders are part of a family, not independent.
The formation manual of the OFS makes this point very emphatically. It states that the friars have no authority over the OFS. Their role is purely pastoral. They have no vote in any matter other than pastoral matters and they cannot overrule the Minister of the Fraternity, the Regional Minister or the Minister General.
It explicitly addresses the chain of command in the order and the friars are not in that chain. It defines “higher moderation”, which is the term that Canon Law uses, to mean spiritual guidance, not juridical authority. It even goes as far as discouraging the Secular Franciscans from looking to the friars for guidance on anything other than pastoral matters and it identifies this attachment to the friars as a problem to be avoided.
The same formation manual clearly expresses that the OFS is not a part of the Franciscan Order, but is its own order. It’s not a Franciscan association, but a real canonical order as it was erected as such by Pope Honorius III and this had never been revoked. It is the only third order that was ever canonically erected as an order.
J
JReducation
Guest
Pope Benedict XV made reference to this in Sacra Propediem
Francis, in the impossibility of opening the cloister to all whom the desire of being formed in his school drew to him, resolved to procure, even for souls living in the whirlpool of the world, the means to tend to Christian perfection. He founded, then, an Order properly called Tertiaries, differing from the two other Orders in that it would not bear the bond of the religious vows, but would be characterized by the same simplicity of life and the same spirit of penance. Thus the project which no founder of a regular Order had yet imagined, to cause the religious life to be practised by all, Francis first conceived the idea of and the grace of God gave him to realize it with the greatest success.
This sentence is very important, because it clarifies that the OFS was founded with the intent of bringing religious life out of the cloister into the secular world through the third order.
In1883, Pope Leo XIII wrote Misericor Dei Filius, which was a new constitution for the Franciscan Third Order. In the cover letter that went with this constitution, he tells the friars,
**
“Let none believethat these changes take away anything whatsoever from the essential principles of that Order. We wish absolutely that they remain in their integrity, and secure from any branch.”**
This last part of the sentence is very important, because the friars of all the branches of the Franciscan family have always interpreted to mean that they are not to tamper with the third order, nor is any branch of the Franciscan family to consider itself an authority over the Third Order.
That’s why I say, it’s not what the paper says that’s important, but how it’s understood by the leadership of both friars and Secular Franciscans and the fact that their understanding is canonically sound and approved by the Holy See.
In 2006, the Minister General of the Capuchin Franciscans wrote to the spiritual assistants and reminded them of the following.
The ministry to the SFO is truly ‘assistance’ and not control of the SFO. This responsibility, which is clearly accentuated in the Statues for Spiritual and Pastoral Assistance to the Secular Franciscan Order, is already referred to by Pope Benedict XIII. In his Bull Paternae Sedis Apostolicae he reminds the Minister General that ‘as successor of St. Francis he has the duty of rendering spiritual assistance to the Third Order.’
He wrote this to correct the misunderstanding of the term “Higher Moderation”. He went on to explain that the term had to be understood in the context of Franciscan tradition and according to the mind of Francis and Cardinal Hugolino who jointly founded the Third Order. The term, as it is used in Canon Law, allows for each institute to expand it according to its charism. For example, among the Dominicans it means that the entire Dominican family is governed by the Dominican Master General. Each fraternity is overseen by one of the friars. Among the Franciscans it has a completely different meaning. Pope Benedict XIII prohibited treating the Secular Franciscans as an arm of the Franciscan Order, but they were to be treated as another Franciscan Order with Francis as its canonical founder.
But to see how this plays out, one has to be involved in one of the secular orders. Each of them is like a piece of music, where it’s structure plays just the right tune for its needs and its place in the Church.
This is should really come to an end, because it’s getting silly trying to explain something that really has to been seen to be understood at all of its levels. The internet is not the place to gain such comprehension and reading canon law without guidance is not helpful, because one misses the nuances and the parameters of the law, as well as the intent of the person who wrote it.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
Francis, in the impossibility of opening the cloister to all whom the desire of being formed in his school drew to him, resolved to procure, even for souls living in the whirlpool of the world, the means to tend to Christian perfection. He founded, then, an Order properly called Tertiaries, differing from the two other Orders in that it would not bear the bond of the religious vows, but would be characterized by the same simplicity of life and the same spirit of penance. Thus the project which no founder of a regular Order had yet imagined, to cause the religious life to be practised by all, Francis first conceived the idea of and the grace of God gave him to realize it with the greatest success.
This sentence is very important, because it clarifies that the OFS was founded with the intent of bringing religious life out of the cloister into the secular world through the third order.
In1883, Pope Leo XIII wrote Misericor Dei Filius, which was a new constitution for the Franciscan Third Order. In the cover letter that went with this constitution, he tells the friars,
**
“Let none believethat these changes take away anything whatsoever from the essential principles of that Order. We wish absolutely that they remain in their integrity, and secure from any branch.”**
This last part of the sentence is very important, because the friars of all the branches of the Franciscan family have always interpreted to mean that they are not to tamper with the third order, nor is any branch of the Franciscan family to consider itself an authority over the Third Order.
That’s why I say, it’s not what the paper says that’s important, but how it’s understood by the leadership of both friars and Secular Franciscans and the fact that their understanding is canonically sound and approved by the Holy See.
In 2006, the Minister General of the Capuchin Franciscans wrote to the spiritual assistants and reminded them of the following.
The ministry to the SFO is truly ‘assistance’ and not control of the SFO. This responsibility, which is clearly accentuated in the Statues for Spiritual and Pastoral Assistance to the Secular Franciscan Order, is already referred to by Pope Benedict XIII. In his Bull Paternae Sedis Apostolicae he reminds the Minister General that ‘as successor of St. Francis he has the duty of rendering spiritual assistance to the Third Order.’
He wrote this to correct the misunderstanding of the term “Higher Moderation”. He went on to explain that the term had to be understood in the context of Franciscan tradition and according to the mind of Francis and Cardinal Hugolino who jointly founded the Third Order. The term, as it is used in Canon Law, allows for each institute to expand it according to its charism. For example, among the Dominicans it means that the entire Dominican family is governed by the Dominican Master General. Each fraternity is overseen by one of the friars. Among the Franciscans it has a completely different meaning. Pope Benedict XIII prohibited treating the Secular Franciscans as an arm of the Franciscan Order, but they were to be treated as another Franciscan Order with Francis as its canonical founder.
But to see how this plays out, one has to be involved in one of the secular orders. Each of them is like a piece of music, where it’s structure plays just the right tune for its needs and its place in the Church.
This is should really come to an end, because it’s getting silly trying to explain something that really has to been seen to be understood at all of its levels. The internet is not the place to gain such comprehension and reading canon law without guidance is not helpful, because one misses the nuances and the parameters of the law, as well as the intent of the person who wrote it.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
B
Bookcat
Guest
I do.
(professed …and I have also served as the leader of a community as well as a formation director of novices)
J
jwinch2
Guest
Thank you Brother, as always.
I should add for purposes of clarity, that while the Dominican Laity does fall underneath the Master of the Order which is quite different from the OFS, there is also something which is similar. This being that a religious promoter, be it a friar, sister, or nun, is not allowed to interfere in the governance of the local chapter. They are there to provide spiritual direction and guidance. They can offer opinions on decisions which the chapter needs to make, particularly when asked, but they cannot vote or overrule the chapter moderator.
Peace,
I should add for purposes of clarity, that while the Dominican Laity does fall underneath the Master of the Order which is quite different from the OFS, there is also something which is similar. This being that a religious promoter, be it a friar, sister, or nun, is not allowed to interfere in the governance of the local chapter. They are there to provide spiritual direction and guidance. They can offer opinions on decisions which the chapter needs to make, particularly when asked, but they cannot vote or overrule the chapter moderator.
Peace,
J
JReducation
Guest
B
Bookcat
Guest
Again Brother I am not contesting the inner workings or particular nature of the Secular Franciscan Order (I must admit too I have not read the long posts above fully) … I was simply noting is that they still are under CIC 303. All third orders are – even though the manifestation of how such incarnates is different. That is what I was getting at.Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
Even if one third order does something entirely different than all the others…they do it under that canon …all be it incarnated very differently.
J
JReducation
Guest
In 2006, the General Chapter asked Brother Felix Cangelosi, OFM Cap, then Minister General of the Capuchin Franciscans, to give the definitive theological explanation of profession in the Secular Franciscans. The friars wanted to understand it better.
He said the following:
**This prescription is found in all religious legislation at the time, and indicates esteem not only for the Rule of any particular Institute but also for the life lived there with the support of the Rule. The commitments of profession/promise, in fact, are life-long and can only change in the direction of greater intensity.
What we have now shown in the primitive legislation of the Franciscan movement enables us to list the constitutive elements of the profession of the Brothers and Sisters of Penance. It involves:
a) an obligation contracted before God;
b) the commitment to observe a form of life or Rule;
c) definitive incorporation into the Order.
The same elements are also constitutive of religious profession, and this leads us to maintain that the propositum vitae or promise of the Secular Franciscan Penitents are equivalent to a religious profession.**
This part was very interesting, because it was approved by Pope Benedict and by Cardinal Levada as theologically correct, which is very different from what Canon Law says about profession in third orders. Canon Law speaks about some kind of bond, but not of a bond that is equivalent to religious profession.
That’s why I said before, be careful with Canon Law. You can easily trip up. A great deal is not said, because it cannot cover every possible exception or situation. The Jesuits are proof of that. For every canon on religious life, they have three exceptions.
I always tease them about that.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
He said the following:
**This prescription is found in all religious legislation at the time, and indicates esteem not only for the Rule of any particular Institute but also for the life lived there with the support of the Rule. The commitments of profession/promise, in fact, are life-long and can only change in the direction of greater intensity.
What we have now shown in the primitive legislation of the Franciscan movement enables us to list the constitutive elements of the profession of the Brothers and Sisters of Penance. It involves:
a) an obligation contracted before God;
b) the commitment to observe a form of life or Rule;
c) definitive incorporation into the Order.
The same elements are also constitutive of religious profession, and this leads us to maintain that the propositum vitae or promise of the Secular Franciscan Penitents are equivalent to a religious profession.**
This part was very interesting, because it was approved by Pope Benedict and by Cardinal Levada as theologically correct, which is very different from what Canon Law says about profession in third orders. Canon Law speaks about some kind of bond, but not of a bond that is equivalent to religious profession.
That’s why I said before, be careful with Canon Law. You can easily trip up. A great deal is not said, because it cannot cover every possible exception or situation. The Jesuits are proof of that. For every canon on religious life, they have three exceptions.
I always tease them about that.Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
B
Bookcat
Guest
Certainly the Order of Penitents that St. Francis began (that very early Rule) was more like the religious of the day than what Secular Orders are today. Such was also the case often with the way things were understood in other fields. St. Catherine of Siena to give a very rich example – was very much more like a Religious than Lay Dominicans today. Though certainly she was also very different than the Religious of her day.
In part I think it can be said that with the re-emphasis and the development of doctrine of the nature of the vocation of the laity in the Church and the world with their particular secular character --has come a very good flowering and developing of the understanding of the nature of the Third Orders …often now called Secular Orders or the like. The living of the charism of the founder (s) within world with their distinctly secular character. In away I think one can say they have “become more themselves”.
In part I think it can be said that with the re-emphasis and the development of doctrine of the nature of the vocation of the laity in the Church and the world with their particular secular character --has come a very good flowering and developing of the understanding of the nature of the Third Orders …often now called Secular Orders or the like. The living of the charism of the founder (s) within world with their distinctly secular character. In away I think one can say they have “become more themselves”.
B
Bookcat
Guest
It is very good that Canon 303 does not get into the specifics of the profession of tertaries or the life of the various third orders. (thankfully…for it leaves room for rich diversity) It outlines some general aspects of great importance.
The various secular orders approach profession and other specifics in ways unique to each.
The various secular orders approach profession and other specifics in ways unique to each.
B
Bookcat
Guest
Certainly the Order of Penitents that St. Francis began (that very early Rule) was more like the religious of the day than what Secular Orders are today (due to the times). Such was also the case often with the way things were understood in other fields. St. Catherine of Siena to give a very rich example – was very much more like a Religious than Lay Dominicans today. Though certainly she was also very different than the Religious of her day.
In part I think it can be said that with the re-emphasis and the development of doctrine of the nature of the vocation of the laity in the Church and the world with their particular secular character --has come a very good flowering and developing of the understanding of the nature of the Third Orders …often now called Secular Orders or the like. The living of the Charism of the founder (s) within the world with their distinctly secular character. In away I think one can say they have “become more themselves”.
In part I think it can be said that with the re-emphasis and the development of doctrine of the nature of the vocation of the laity in the Church and the world with their particular secular character --has come a very good flowering and developing of the understanding of the nature of the Third Orders …often now called Secular Orders or the like. The living of the Charism of the founder (s) within the world with their distinctly secular character. In away I think one can say they have “become more themselves”.
B
Bookcat
Guest
Each third order certainly has its distinct way of life, Constitutions (etc) and understanding of its particular identity-- even while sharing the general aspects noted in Canon 303 in the Code of Canon Law issued by Bl. Pope John Paul II in 1983 ( incarnated in various ways -according to way of each).
Over the many centuries of the existence of the various third orders – one finds that there has been various approaches to understanding the nature and vocation formed by the thought and movements of the particular time period. It is very interesting to read the various writings over the ages when one can find such. Even the rules going back to the time of Pope Pious XI in the 1920’s are interesting --but certainly different from those of the 21st century
Over the many centuries of the existence of the various third orders – one finds that there has been various approaches to understanding the nature and vocation formed by the thought and movements of the particular time period. It is very interesting to read the various writings over the ages when one can find such. Even the rules going back to the time of Pope Pious XI in the 1920’s are interesting --but certainly different from those of the 21st century
J
JReducation
Guest
I don’t see why you keep bringing up Canon 303. Canon 303 is deliberately vague so that it does not have to go into explicit details about the different kinds of secular orders.Each third order certainly has its distinct way of life, Constitutions (etc) and understanding of its particular identity-- even while sharing the general aspects noted in Canon 303 in the Code of Canon Law issued by Bl. Pope John Paul II in 1983 ( incarnated in various ways -according to way of each).
Over the many centuries of the existence of the various third orders – one finds that there has been various approaches to understanding the nature and vocation formed by the thought and movements of the particular time period. It is very interesting to read the various writings over the ages when one can find such. Even the rules going back to the time of Pope Pious XI in the 1920’s are interesting --but certainly different from those of the 21st century
Look at it.
Can. 303 Associations whose members share in the spirit of some religious institute while in secular life, lead an apostolic life, and strive for Christian perfection under the higher direction of the same institute are called third orders or some other appropriate name.
To begin with, not every association that shares a spirituality with an institute of consecrated life can call itself a third order, since most institutes of consecrated life are not orders, they are congregations or societies of apostolic life. There is one part of the canon that has to be loosely interpreted.
Under the higher direction is defined by the constitutions, the rule (if they have one) and its tradition. This is what we’ve been trying to tell you that the OFS is unique, since it does not answer to any of the friars or the major superiors of the friars. It’s relationship with the friars is a pastoral one, not juridical. That relationship is very important, because they need spiritual and liturgical guidance more than they need guidance on economics apostolic work or formation. That, they can do for themselves. The have put out a very impressive formation program that I’m still reading. But this point is precisely one that I read about the other night, where they instruct the novices that the friars are not to be look to for leadership, because there is no legal or canonical connection between the two orders. They explain that Canon 303 does not apply in a literal way to them. Higher direction to them is spiritual, not authoritative. It would be impossible, since the Franciscan family has four Ministers General, unlike the Dominicans who have one Master General or the Carmelites who have one Prior General.
To understand how Canon 303 applies to the OFS, you have to read it the way that a Franciscan canon lawyer reads it, with great flexibility and a great deal of nuance. Because he has to reconcile Canon Law with the constitutions of everyone involved and with Franciscan tradition.
There is another piece here that has not been mentioned. In the constitutions of the friars the only thing that it says about the Secular Franciscans is that whenever possible, they should provide a spiritual assistant, if the OFS asks for one. It does not say that they have to do so, nor do the constitutions say that the friars have any responsibility for the OFS. We look at the OFS the same way that we look at the Poor Clares. They’re part of our family, but they’re on their own. It’s like a family of multiple adult children each with his household. They continue to be siblings, but once they establish their own homes and nuclear families, they’re on their own.
You should simply take the secular orders on their terms, not on canon law’s terms, because the canons are not applied the same way and parts of the canons are not applied at all. If you’re attracted to one of the orders, explore them, but take them on their terms. Hear the law as they follow it, not as you read it. At the end of the day, it is you who want to join them, not the other way around.
Remember, Canon Law was not meant to be applied rigidly, but it is very nuanced. Pope Paul VI made it that way very deliberately. One of the things that he did not like about the code 1917 was that it was very specific. When something new happened, you had to scurry to create a law. Unfortunately, he died before the project was completed. However, Bl. John Paul allowed the canon lawyers to finish the work and made it even more nuanced. This allows great flexibility in the applications of certain things. Bl. John Paul called for specificity in some things that he felt had to be very specific and for vagueness in those things that he felt need to cover a wider scope.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
B
Bookcat
Guest
Why?
I am bringing up for it is what is the canon that is in common for ALL secular third orders.
I started this thread not about the Secular Franciscan Order --but Secular Third Orders in General.
Details can differ among the various Secular Orders.
And wonderfully the do
- Status