She and I are both recent converts so lots of things that may be common for someone like yourself who is highly educated in the faith are interesting to newbies like us.
Particularly things like this which are not covered as part of the RCIA process.
In fact, I would go so far to say that many long time Catholics find it interesting as well. All you have to do is take a look at the number of threads on secular/third orders in recent months or search on Catholic spirituality to find the same thing. I don’t get the impression that many people, even clergy or long time highly active Catholics know much about religious and their spiritual approach. I think that many of the same are actually searching for this sort of thing, some without even knowing it. Take a look on Amazon sometime at the number of books on “spirituality according to
xyz order” or which are titled “praying with
xyz” and you will see the same thing.
The activity and involvement of of the laity, from everyone I speak to about the subject, appears to be on the up swing. With that increase in involvement comes a search for a way or an approach if you will to proceed in their own continued formation in the faith. While many are turning to newer lay groups, many also seem to be going back in the tradition of the Church to groups such as yours to find a way of structuring their lives according to God’s plan and while doing so, making sure they are being faithful to the Magesterium in the process. In fact, I think many of the faithful are starving for it.
I’m not sure if you are noticing that same trend or not. I have talked to multiple priests, deacons, and religious and almost to a person they claim that they are noticing something along those lines. I’m not sure I am explaining it all that well so I hope my point is coming across accurately.
Ahhh, now I see why it would be interesting. I guess I never thought of it that way before.
I also see many lay people seeking to learn more about the faith and about Catholic tradition. I lead a group of such men. It started with one fellow asking me questions. He brought a friend and that one brought another and in two months we had 12 guys to whom I teach philosophy and theology every Monday night.
The problem that I’m having with them is that I am finding that I have to deprogram their “Americanism” out of them. They have a difficult time seeing the big picture or what I call the global picture. The tendency is to try to think about the Church using the same rules that they use for civil discourse. It does not work.
The traditions of Catholic orders are a composite of many schools of philosophy, many cultural experiences, many historical contexts and exegesis all packaged into different schools. They’re all grounded in the same values and truth, but they are very unique expressions of that truth and those values.
Our American mind has trouble with anything that is so diverse. We’re very rigid thinkers. Everything has to fit the way we think and the way we do things. We try to do to religious orders and their respective schools of spirituality what we do to those cultures that we conquer. We try to impose our American values and our American way.
This question about titles is an excellent example. We tend to think of clergy and religious in a very utilitarian fashion, because we are a utilitarian society. We value things and people basd on what they give us. The more they give us, the more value they have in our estimation. Therefore, we place a higher value on a child who becomes a doctor or a lawyer than on one who becomes a geography teacher or a butcher.
When we look at clergy and religious, we need to know who is the guy that can celebrate mass and hear confessions.
It’s important to understand that the greatest ministry of the Church is the Eucharist and the absolution of sins. But there is a difference between a ministry and a way of life. Also, there are many necessary ministries, along with this particular ministry.
I have found, among the men that I’m educating that they never thought about separating ministry and way of life. That’s because in our American society, we equate the two. A boy grows up to be a doctor. So we say.
The truth is that a boy grows up to be a man. Being a physician is a role in society, albeit a very necessary and helpful role, but it is not a man.
The same happens with the boy who grows up to be priest. Not true. He grows up to be a man, a good man. A good man cam become a good priest. God calls good men to be priests. But you must first be a good man.
When speaking of religious, the wording changes. A monk, nun, sister, friar or clerk regular is not a role. It’s a way of living the Gospel based on one of those schools that I spoke about. To understand what he or she is about, you have to understand the school by which he lives the Gospel. He can be a priest, but need not be. You don’t need to be a priest to live the Gospel as a monk or friar. The priesthood is his place in the Church and it defines his ministry or his service to the people of God. Being a monk or friar defines how he lives, not how he serves. It’s a whole other concept that has to be studied separately and appreicated separately. To do this, one has to learn to think globally instead of linear.
