Aren’t we all called to be the salt of the earth?
Anyway, here is an example of the topic of this thread. Let’s say we are discussing standing around the altar holding hands during mass - laity and clergy. And let’s say that was something that was never seen in parishes before. And suppose people are unhappy about it and decry it as an innovation.
It wouldn’t make sense to say well, such and such order has held mass this way for 1000 years.
The obvious answer would be “that’s nice”, but what does that have to do with innovations that are currently happening in parishes.* Are they trying to emulate this order, or are they just trying to foster relationships between people at the mass and so has added, what is an innovation in parishes, even if not for such and such order?
See what I’m saying?
I see what you’re saying and the answer is that it could be either
a) they’re adopting a practice from a religious order because of its meaning, which is legitimate, even if the parishioners don’t like it.
b) they’re being creative, by adopting something from a religious order because it’s new and different, which is not a legitimate reason for doing so.
It’s hard to answer, which one it is, unless one knows the mind of the person introducing the custom. It may be one of those “creative” types, which does not lend legitimacy to the adoption. However, it can also be a pastor or priest who has a special fondness for a particular religious school, which has all the legitimacy in the world.
This takes us back to the “salt of the earth” statement. The Church has officially assigned that mission to religious orders. What religious do is meant to be for all, which translates into, all should be the salt of the earth. What is different about the religious that only he or she can do, is that only he or she can be salt of the earth to the degree that he becomes an eschatological sign. Only the religious can be a sign of things to come. If we’re using the salt metaphor, a way to understand it would be that the religious adds an intensity that no one else can add. No one else has the grace of consecration. Bl. John Paul goes on and one about this for pages in Vita Consecrata. Pefectae Caritatis speaks about it briefly. Both are trying to go further into doctrine that the Council of Trent tried to explain, but which has been around for centuries. In other words, the Council Fathers didn’t suddenly discover it. It was more like everyone believed it, but no one had put it into words until Trent.
Going back to the example that you gave, let’s say that Father is truly moved by Cistercian spirituality, which is a legitimate and honorable school of spirituality, then we can say that the Cistercians have added flavor to Father’s life and to the Church. Father is taking what the Holy Spirit gave to the Church, through the Cistercians, out into the world. The gift was meant for the world. The Cistercians are being salt and Father is carrying the salt with him to his assignment. Next year he makes a retreat at a Carmelite house and the Holy Spirit attracts his attention to something in the Carmelite school that is meaningful. Father will take that gift with him too his assignment and add it to the Cistercian gift that he brought before.
I guess that’s the beauty of being a diocesan priest. You can pick up and blend pieces from different schools of spirituality, because as a secular Catholic, you’re not boxed in to one school.
For example, a Franciscan wearing a crucifix would look ridiculous. A Redemptorist wearing a crucifix looks very normal. Why? Franciscan men have a devotion to the cross, not to the crucifix. Redemptorist men have a devotion to the crucifix, not to the cross. That’s what I mean by being boxed in.
Father and the parishioners have to understand that it’s a gift, not a command. If it is used, it is legitimate… If it is laid aside, it is also legitimate to do so. The gift will do what it’s supposed to do when it is introduced with good catechesis. Otherwise, it’s a pastoral disaster.
Do most people know about the tabernacle, stations of the cross, Christmas creche, passion play, Christmas pageant, plain chant or hymns in the vernacular? Most people accept these things as Catholic and some think that it’s universally Catholic. WRONG! They’re all of Franciscan origin. The Church adopted them, just like the 15 decade rosary. The Dominicans introduced it and most Catholics adopted it. But there are rosaries with less decades, not as well known.
That’s how you carry over from the religious communities into the secular side of the Church. It’s done for the same reason as it’s done in the religious school and it’s done in a way that most people understand it. I say most, because it’s never going to be everyone. Some people will always say, “Tell me again why we’re doing this?” Trust me, it has happened to me many times.
I remember when the FFV started to work in pregnancy centers that have traditionally been run by diocesan priests and lay people. We introduced St. Maximilian Kolbe and the novena to St. Max in August. St. Max is Franciscan and the patron saint of pro-life workers. Five-years later, I’m still hearing, “Why do we pray the novena to St. Max?” Except that now, the answer comes in chorus, because the diocesan priests, deacons and other lay people know the answer. BECAUSE HE’S THE PATRON OF PRO LIFE AND A FRANCISCAN!!!.
Some people are just going to forget or not get it in the first place.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
These are my favorite churches in Rome! Some of them are built smack on top of pagan temples which is symbolic of us replacing them. We still have ideas about what churches are supposed to look like from these buildings.