The Perfect Joy of St. Francis

[rainbow1]

Thanks Br.Jay for the great explanations…could you elaborate a little on the history of “sisters” vs nuns. I think you said that “sisters” could be married at some point, but I am wondering if that still is true? Are modern day “sisters” out in the world yet living in community, while nuns are cloistered? Also, for the cloistered nuns, are their titles sister…like Sister Mary? Sorry for all my confusion…

 

[JReducation]

Thanks Br.Jay for the great explanations…could you elaborate a little on the history of “sisters” vs nuns. I think you said that “sisters” could be married at some point, but I am wondering if that still is true? Are modern day “sisters” out in the world yet living in community, while nuns are cloistered? Also, for the cloistered nuns, are their titles sister…like Sister Mary? Sorry for all my confusion…

Before going further, let’s clarify. Sisters are celibate. They do not marry.

The confusion comes because the original name that St. Francis gave to the Secular Franciscan Order was the Brothers and Sisters of Penance. Since they were married women, it gave the false impression that religious sisters were married. Religious sisters do not marry.

A nun belongs to a religious order, lives in a monastery or an abbey, makes solemn vows and does not engage in external apostolic work. The Church views solemn vows are a deepr commitment than ordinary vows made by other religious. Most religious make simple vows. Nuns, monks, and Jesuit priests make solemn vows. Married people make solemn vows to each other.

A religious sister belongs to a religious congregation, lives in a community house often called a convent, but not necessary. Sisters make simple vows and engage in external apostolic work.

The reason for the distinction is because of the apostolic work. If a woman consecrates her life to God as a nun, it is exclusively for Him. There is no room in that relationship for other human beings. Therefore, a nun does not serve the laity. She lives totally for Christ. Her life of prayer, silence and solitude earns graces for her and for the world. Nuns are the counterpart of monks. All 23 Catholic Churches have nuns.

A woman religious who serves the laity cannot be a nun, because she has to share her love, life and time between God and his people. The Church considers this to be a lesser degree of consecration, because the relationship between God and the religious is not as intimate as is that of a monk or a nun. She does not allow sisters to make solemn vows. They make simple vows.

Most sisters make vows for life, after completing their formation. However, there are some sisters who never make perpetual vows. They make vows for one year at a time and they renew each year. This allows them to leave at any time when the vows expire. For example, the Daughters of Charity renew their vows every year. They do not live in convents. They do not have novitiates. They are consecrated religious women, but they never make a lifelong commitment. They renew it every year on March 25.

This really upset many people who did not know this about them when they went from wearing the cornette to a blue dress and no veil. People always thought they were nuns. The truth is that their founders deliberately avoided this. St. Vincent de Paul, St. Louise de Marillac and St. Elizabeth Ann Seton wanted the sisters to be able to come and go, because many of the first sisters were widows with children. Louise was a mother and so was Elizabeth. By not making perpetual vows, they were free to leave at any time, when the vows expired, if it was necessary to do so in order to care for their children. Of course, as we know, both Louise and Elizabeth died as religious. But that safety net had to be built in for the young foundresses and their children.

As years passed, many women congregated to teach, nurse, care for the elderly, orphan, and the poor. They borrowed many customs from the nuns such as habits and government. Many of these groups of women wanted to follow St. Francis and also serve the people of God. These groups became the first congregations of Franciscan Sisters.

They follow the life of St. Francis, but they mitigate poverty, prayer, solitude and silence in order to seve the laity. Most of these early sisters were originally Secular Franciscan women. As they congregated, they made vows, move into common houses and they were separated from the Secular Franciscans and erected as independent Franciscan communities.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[rainbow1]

Hello Br.Jay,
Could you give some more insight to me on the comment you made about “the greatest expression of poverty is when you don’t own your own intelligence, opinion, or self”? How does the laity follow St.Francis in this concept when we live in such a secularized world? Blessings…

 

[choliks]

September 17 is also the feast day of the Stigmata of St. Francis. I didn’t know about this until a Jesuit priest friend of mine told us during his homily, as he was invited by Franciscan sisters to celebrate the Eucharist for them earlier. Amazing.

 

[JReducation]

Hello Br.Jay,
Could you give some more insight to me on the comment you made about “the greatest expression of poverty is when you don’t own your own intelligence, opinion, or self”? How does the laity follow St.Francis in this concept when we live in such a secularized world? Blessings…

Let’s deal with the obvious first. We all think and we all have opinions about things. It’s impossible not to do so. That being said, it does not mean that everything that we think and every opinion that we have has to be shared.

This is one of those areas that is actually expressed in Canon Law. I can’t recall the exact number, but somewhere in the 200 section there is a canon about the laity’s right to communicate its needs and concerns to the bishop and the Church. However, if one reads the statement very slowly, it says something that we often fail to do.

We’re pretty good at jumping on the wagon and saying, “I have a right to express my opinion, the Constitution gives me that right or Canon Law gives me that right.” However, we are not too attentive to the other part of that law. It speaks of communicating with due reverence.

We don’ t have the right to run our mouths. My communication with others, especially with the Church’s authorities is always about our common good, not about what I believe or what I would like to see.

This is another level of voluntary poverty for the sake of the Kingdom. I speak up and about what is for the benefit of God’s people. All too often, we say that we’re speaking for God’s people, but we’re really mouthing off for our benefit. We like to hear ourselves talk and we like to impose our beliefs on the whole. It becomes very obvious when we’re obnoxioius in our communication. The canon got it right. If you’re truly interested in the common good, you factor in that the person in authority is part of the community. He is not your enemy. Therefore, you speak to him with great reverence. This means that you have to set aside your feelings for him or your opinion of him.

I’m not trying to know more than God or be more Catholic than the pope. I’m hoping for the common good. If I can’t speak for the common good, then I simply remain quiet. I accept that I don’t really have anything to say. In that regard, I am poor, because I have nothing to offer.

If I have something to say I do so with reverence. Again I am poor, because I put the other person first as a servant would his master.

This is where I have a personal problem with many blogs and videos on the Internet. They are often about the blogger or the personality on the video. He or she spills out all of his or her rhetoric without regard for the person to whom he’s speaking or the person about whom he’s speaking. This kind of communication is what St. Francis condemned as prideful the demeanor one who wants to impress that he’s right, even if he has to offend to do so and then he takes the high road by saying things like, “People are offended by truth.”

Francis often said that people are rarely offended by truth. People are usually offended by those who want to bully others into accepting their perception of the truth. He always taught us that the truth is gentle. He alwasy pointed to the Gospels and showed us that while Christ often gave the people a scolding, he quickly turned around and did something for them that showed how much he loved them. He did not drop the stink bomb in the middle of the room and leave. That is not the behavior of the poor man from Nazareth. That is the behavior of the arrrogant tyrrant.

September 17 is also the feast day of the Stigmata of St. Francis. I didn’t know about this until a Jesuit priest friend of mine told us during his homily, as he was invited by Franciscan sisters to celebrate the Eucharist for them earlier. Amazing.

The Stigmata of Our Holy Father Francis is intimately connected to the Feast of the Exultation of the Holy Cross. I always makes me want to say, “Be careful what you pray for.” Francis was on retreat during the feast fo the Exultation of the Cross and he asked the Lord to grant him the grace to suffer in his body what Christ suffered out of love for us.

A few days later, his body was imprinted with the wounds of Christ, nails and all. It is the first known stigmata. He actually had nails, which no other stigmatist had had.

The miracle is not the important part. God performed the miracle. The important part for us is the love. Francis followed St. Paul’s advice to the letter; “Be conformed to Christ in all things.” He wanted to be like Christ, not only in his charity and his virtue, but also in his redemptive suffering.

When Francis looked at the cross he saw two bars, one for love and the other for obedience. Christ obeyed because he loved and he showed his love by obeying even unto death.

Francis teaches us that such love is possible. It is truly possible for an ordinary person to imitate Christ and slowly be transformed into a reflection of Christ. Francis was not created an angel. He was a young man like any other young man. He had dreams for the future. He has memories, joyful and sad ones. He has his fears like everyone else. He had sins and human flaws. What we learn from him is that despite all of this, we can chip away at our lives and gradually become mirros of perfection, if we truly obey and love.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[rainbow1]

Let’s deal with the obvious first. We all think and we all have opinions about things. It’s impossible not to do so. That being said, it does not mean that everything that we think and every opinion that we have has to be shared.

This is one of those areas that is actually expressed in Canon Law. I can’t recall the exact number, but somewhere in the 200 section there is a canon about the laity’s right to communicate its needs and concerns to the bishop and the Church. However, if one reads the statement very slowly, it says something that we often fail to do.

We’re pretty good at jumping on the wagon and saying, “I have a right to express my opinion, the Constitution gives me that right or Canon Law gives me that right.” However, we are not too attentive to the other part of that law. It speaks of communicating with due reverence.

We don’ t have the right to run our mouths. My communication with others, especially with the Church’s authorities is always about our common good, not about what I believe or what I would like to see.

This is another level of voluntary poverty for the sake of the Kingdom. I speak up and about what is for the benefit of God’s people. All too often, we say that we’re speaking for God’s people, but we’re really mouthing off for our benefit. We like to hear ourselves talk and we like to impose our beliefs on the whole. It becomes very obvious when we’re obnoxioius in our communication. The canon got it right. If you’re truly interested in the common good, you factor in that the person in authority is part of the community. He is not your enemy. Therefore, you speak to him with great reverence. This means that you have to set aside your feelings for him or your opinion of him.

I’m not trying to know more than God or be more Catholic than the pope. I’m hoping for the common good. If I can’t speak for the common good, then I simply remain quiet. I accept that I don’t really have anything to say. In that regard, I am poor, because I have nothing to offer.

If I have something to say I do so with reverence. Again I am poor, because I put the other person first as a servant would his master.

This is where I have a personal problem with many blogs and videos on the Internet. They are often about the blogger or the personality on the video. He or she spills out all of his or her rhetoric without regard for the person to whom he’s speaking or the person about whom he’s speaking. This kind of communication is what St. Francis condemned as prideful the demeanor one who wants to impress that he’s right, even if he has to offend to do so and then he takes the high road by saying things like, “People are offended by truth.”

Francis often said that people are rarely offended by truth. People are usually offended by those who want to bully others into accepting their perception of the truth. He always taught us that the truth is gentle. He alwasy pointed to the Gospels and showed us that while Christ often gave the people a scolding, he quickly turned around and did something for them that showed how much he loved them. He did not drop the stink bomb in the middle of the room and leave. That is not the behavior of the poor man from Nazareth. That is the behavior of the arrrogant tyrrant.

The Stigmata of Our Holy Father Francis is intimately connected to the Feast of the Exultation of the Holy Cross. I always makes me want to say, “Be careful what you pray for.” Francis was on retreat during the feast fo the Exultation of the Cross and he asked the Lord to grant him the grace to suffer in his body what Christ suffered out of love for us.

A few days later, his body was imprinted with the wounds of Christ, nails and all. It is the first known stigmata. He actually had nails, which no other stigmatist had had.

The miracle is not the important part. God performed the miracle. The important part for us is the love. Francis followed St. Paul’s advice to the letter; “Be conformed to Christ in all things.” He wanted to be like Christ, not only in his charity and his virtue, but also in his redemptive suffering.

When Francis looked at the cross he saw two bars, one for love and the other for obedience. Christ obeyed because he loved and he showed his love by obeying even unto death.

Francis teaches us that such love is possible. It is truly possible for an ordinary person to imitate Christ and slowly be transformed into a reflection of Christ. Francis was not created an angel. He was a young man like any other young man. He had dreams for the future. He has memories, joyful and sad ones. He has his fears like everyone else. He had sins and human flaws. What we learn from him is that despite all of this, we can chip away at our lives and gradually become mirros of perfection, if we truly obey and love.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Thanks so much Br.Jay…I understand it alot better now…it is all about being a servant, even down to one’s thoughts.
I loved the part where you said truth is gentle. That is food for thought.
Thanks again.
Blessings.

 

[JReducation]

Thanks so much Br.Jay…I understand it alot better now…it is all about being a servant, even down to one’s thoughts.
I loved the part where you said truth is gentle. That is food for thought.
Thanks again.
Blessings.

Many people mourn the fact that our current pope is not a Thomist; which actually is not quite true. Pope Benedict often ueses Aquinas’ methods. However, he is much more the Franciscan and Augustinian. You can see this very strongly in the title of one of his encyclicals, “Truth in Charity” He didn’t pull this title out of his hat. Pope Benedict is a student of St. Bonaventure. Bonaventure was a devout son and student of St. Francis. Truth in charity was a theme in Francis’ teaching and example.

Many Traditionalists have a problem with Francisans’ approach to Islam, because the Observant Franciscans have been in the Middle East for 800 years and have never engaged in a campaign to convert the Muslims or Jews. The fact is that Pope Gregory IX sent them there not to proselytize, but to convert by giving witness to the Truth through works of charity. They were not to say a word unless they were asked. They were to care for all people . . . gentle truth.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[TrueLight]

Many people mourn the fact that our current pope is not a Thomist; which actually is not quite true. Pope Benedict often ueses Aquinas’ methods. However, he is much more the Franciscan and Augustinian. You can see this very strongly in the title of one of his encyclicals, “Truth in Charity” He didn’t pull this title out of his hat. Pope Benedict is a student of St. Bonaventure. Bonaventure was a devout son and student of St. Francis. Truth in charity was a theme in Francis’ teaching and example.

Many Traditionalists have a problem with Francisans’ approach to Islam, because the Observant Franciscans have been in the Middle East for 800 years and have never engaged in a campaign to convert the Muslims or Jews. The fact is that Pope Gregory IX sent them there not to proselytize, but to convert by giving witness to the Truth through works of charity. They were not to say a word unless they were asked. They were to care for all people . . . gentle truth.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

“Preach the Gospel at all times. When necessary, use words.”

 

[Melchior_1]

“Preach the Gospel at all times. When necessary, use words.”

I think I heard somewhere it was Claire who said this to Francis, who liked it so much he ran with it (Brother JR can correct this if it’s wrong).;

Thomism is something that could be a thread all to itself. Strangely, I’ve been studying Dominican spirituality for sometime and I’ve hardly touched Aquinas. don’t get me wrong, he’s a cool guy and I’ll read is work eventually, but he’s not the be all and end all of Dominican spirituality.

Then again, maybe it’s not strange at all, really. Yes, St. Thomas is a Dominican. Yes, he’s one of the more influential writers of the Church. But there’s so much more to the spirituality than just him.

 

[JReducation]

“Preach the Gospel at all times. When necessary, use words.”

BINGO! Give the young lady her money.

I think I heard somewhere it was Claire who said this to Francis, who liked it so much he ran with it (Brother JR can correct this if it’s wrong).;

Thomism is something that could be a thread all to itself. Strangely, I’ve been studying Dominican spirituality for some time and I’ve hardly touched Aquinas. don’t get me wrong, he’s a cool guy and I’ll read is work eventually, but he’s not the be all and end all of Dominican spirituality.

Then again, maybe it’s not strange at all, really. Yes, St. Thomas is a Dominican. Yes, he’s one of the more influential writers of the Church. But there’s so much more to the spirituality than just him.

Actually, Thomas did not write much Ascetical and Mystical Theology. He wrote Systematic Theology, which is a completely different branch of theology. Thomas was not very involved in the direct care of souls as much as he was in education. He was not like a Francis de Sales who wrote volumes of Spiritual Theology for sisters and laymen, because he was a spiritual father to many.

Bonaventure wrote a great deal of Spiritual Theology because he was the General Minister of the Order and a bishop. However, he seems to have been an absentee bishop.

We do know that the early Dominicans were very Augustinian and Dominic himself was very influenced by the Augustinian Canons, whereas the Benedictines of Subiacco influenced Francis more.

What is interesting about both traditions, Augustinian and Benedictine, is that both are strong promoters of conversion through education and hospitality (reason and charity). This was the heritage passed on to the Franciscans and Dominicans.

The contemporary notion of doing battle with non-Catholics is Jesuit in origin. The Jesuits were organized as a military company. The order’s actual name is The Company of Jesus. This explains why there were so many conflicts between the Spanish Conquistadores and the mendicants in Latin America and the Southwestern USA, which was then part of Latin America.

The Franciscans and Dominicans fought tooth and nail against forced conversions. They took many complaints about these practices to the Spanish and Portuguese royal courts. They also did something that only Francis Xavier had ever done. They adapted much of their liturgical practices to accommodate the local culture.

Over the last 500+ years, they managed to convert more indigenous peoples than the Jesuits. Today, we can see this effect in South America. If one goes into the small towns that are populated by the indigenous peoples, one find strong Catholic communities. While in the large cities where the whites and mestizos live, Catholicism is very cool. The dominant white and mestizo culture is very Western in its approach to religion, with people bouncing back and forth between denominations and different schools of spirituality including New Age spirituality.

There is something to be said about a ministry of presence and education in the faith vs one of proselytism. Even Protestantism has not found fertile ground in Latin America. They seem to get many converts, but keep very few. My experience was that it’s a revolving door. People are in awe of the Fundamentalist’s presentation, because it’s very emotional and often intimidating (fire and brimstone and all that stuff). Once the effects wear off, people cool down and they fall away. Unlike Europe and the USA where Protestantism is passed down from generation to generation, you don’t see much of that in Latin America. You find very few families with more than one generation of Protestants You find very few Protestants among the indigenous people and in the small villages and towns outside of the metro areas.

I don’t know about Protestantism, other than what I’ve read. I’ve only met three or four Protestants in my life. My impression is that the Dominican and Franciscan mystique of “Truth and Charity” is difficult for most Fundamentalist Protestants to absorb, because it’s very heavy on works and less so on pure bible. The generosity of the mendicants speaks to people who are in need. Then the usual question follows, “Why do you do what you do?” This is the teaching moment.

 

[JReducation]

On another note, “Preach always, only when necessary use words,” was a statement from Clare to Francis. Francis handed it down to the world. Francis was unhappy when he returned from the Holy Land, because he had failed to convert the Sultan and to stop the war. Legend says that he shared his unhappiness with Clare. He told her that he was discerning whether to become a monk and devote himself to prayer or go back to the missions and try again and Clare gave him this advice.

We do know that Clare was eminently practical, more than Francis. She had a keen eye for the needs of the Church. She was more concerned about the absence of Christianity among Catholics than she was about non-Catholics. In this regard, she was way ahead of her time. She knew that without a strong Catholic Church, trying to convert non-Catholics was an uphill battle. You can’t give what you don’t have. She persuaded Francis to remain in Europe and convert Catholics through exemplary living of the Gospel. Therefore, when the first brothers are sent back to Jerusalem they go with a mandate to preach Truth through Charity.

We’re going to see this theme come through very strongly in the lives of many other saints: Vincent de Paul, Elizabeth Ann Seton, Louise de Marillac, Joaquina of Vedruna, Maximilian Kolbe, Mother Teresa of Calcutta, and John Paul II. Maximillian Kolbe was the first person to articulate what would later be incorporated into Vatican II’s document on ecumenism. He commanded the Conventual Franciscans who were going to Japan and India to find the Truth in Hinduism, Islam and Buddhism. He said that parts of the Catholic Truth was there already, even though it was often deformed and misunderstood. by them. He directed the friars to start the dialog by acknowledging Christ’s presence among the pagans, not by denying it. As a result of his work in Japan, the Japanese government legalized Catholicism and allowed him to build the largest seminary in Asia, which is still there today.

There is a great deal of Catholic Tradition hidden in the folds of these other traditions: Francis, Dominican, Augustinian, Benedictine, etc.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Melchior_1]

The parallels between the Dominicans and Franciscans are striking. There are so many similarities that I can see how both Orders consider the two Saints to be “Holy Father Francis & Holy Father Dominic”.

An Order of Preachers, tempered by Mercy. An Order of Mercy, tempered by preaching. It’s amazing, really.

 

[Monica4316]

This is a really informative thread I want to read this book now.

there’s something I’ve been thinking about; how many possessions should a lay person have? I would say that I have too many possessions and for a while I thought I should bring the number down, but by how much? It’s easier for the religious because they give away everything. I would like to be generous with God and only keep what I absolutely need, but should I go so far because it might upset my family? I also don’t know if I should give away the things that my family gave me because this might upset them a lot and I don’t want to be uncharitable, but I don’t want to potentially put God second either. I want to be prudent but also not say no to God. I am interested in what the Franciscans would say about this. (Br JR?)

 

[Melchior_1]

This is a really informative thread I want to read this book now.

there’s something I’ve been thinking about; how many possessions should a lay person have? I would say that I have too many possessions and for a while I thought I should bring the number down, but by how much? It’s easier for the religious because they give away everything. I would like to be generous with God and only keep what I absolutely need, but should I go so far because it might upset my family? I also don’t know if I should give away the things that my family gave me because this might upset them a lot and I don’t want to be uncharitable, but I don’t want to potentially put God second either. I want to be prudent but also not say no to God. I am interested in what the Franciscans would say about this. (Br JR?)

I can’t speak as an official Franciscan, but I can as an official layman

A lot of voluntary poverty is subjective based on the needs of the person. For example, I have an nine month old son. Although for me I can get away with buying all of my clothes second hand and wear them until they’re threadbare, I’m not going to subject him (or my wife) to the same thing. For them, to live like I do would be a spiritual burden. So I live out my life wearing my simple clothes, eating plain foods, getting the same haircut for the last 16 years.

I do like my video games, and I do have a good desktop computer. These are hobbies, and I still partake in them. But even with this, I don’t rush out and buy things right away. I take my time, I wait awhile. I still have “wants”, but the freedom I have without actually obtaining them is something I love. And it allows me to be able to dedicate more of my resources to ministries I am a part of. Example; rather than buy two new video games, I recently instead bought a cajon (a type of drum). I can use this cajon while doing praise and worship at the Youth Group I help out at, or on retreats,

I’m a simple man, who likes simple things. The concept of voluntary poverty, which some consider to be a spiritual gift, is one that gives so much freedom. If you have this gift, you will find so much joy through it, regardless of others’ opinions. So in this sense, if this is truly what can help bring you closer to the Lord, others’ opinions don’t matter. And really, if they did wonder you could always say “I’m decluttering my life” and they’d probably be cool with it.

I’ve learned one good rule when it comes to families. At the end of the day, there’s only one family member which matters; you spouse. And your kids. Everyone else can deal with it.

ClayPotts is a member of the SFO, maybe she’ll drop by and share some about how Secular Franciscans handle this issue.

 

[JReducation]

This is a really informative thread I want to read this book now.

there’s something I’ve been thinking about; how many possessions should a lay person have? I would say that I have too many possessions and for a while I thought I should bring the number down, but by how much? It’s easier for the religious because they give away everything. I would like to be generous with God and only keep what I absolutely need, but should I go so far because it might upset my family? I also don’t know if I should give away the things that my family gave me because this might upset them a lot and I don’t want to be uncharitable, but I don’t want to potentially put God second either. I want to be prudent but also not say no to God. I am interested in what the Franciscans would say about this. (Br JR?)

I think the issue is one of separating what we want from what we need. Even in caring for our families there is a line. There are definitely things that our children and spouses need for their health, education, faith, safety and emotional well being. There are things that are not necessary for any of the above.

Once we sort through this list, go through the things that you want. Among them, you will find one or two things that you can have without robbing Peter to give to Paul as I say. For example, I have two cats. Do I need cats? Not really. Does having cats take away from what I can give to the poor, to my community, to my country and to others, such as time, money or other resources? Not really. Even though cats have to be fed and they have to get their shots once a year, the cost involved is negligable, provided that I don’t do what some strange people do who treat pets better than they would a child.

We have a brother who has a guitar. Does he need a guitar? Nope. Does having a guitar take away from prayer, charity or is this guitar so special to him that he won’t part with it if necessary? Nope.

Do my cats and Brother’s guitar add a little joy into our lives, joy that we bring to our work and to our community life? Yes.

There are things that are little treats or extras that really make us better people. Even though they are not necessities, they do not take away from what we should be for God and for others and they probably make us more gentle and joyful.

It is equally important, especially in raising a family to teach them that they are not entitled to more than what others have. I was not born a friar. I’m also a dad. I was a widower when my two kids were 4 and 9. They grew up in a very Franciscan home. The rule of thumb was that they were not entitled to anything other than what was necessary. Everything else they had to earn. There were no allowances. No one should be paid for doing his share of the work in a family. There were no extra trips to movies or vacations until all other responsibilities were met. Whatever you wanted you asked for and you were usually told to wait a few days or a few weeks, even when dad had the money. The idea was to teach the kids that in life we have to wait. Of course, they did not know that dad had the money. Dad simply said, “Can you waitl until (insert date)?” As they grew older they would come and say, “Dad, can we get this or that?” or “Dad, do we have enough money for this or that?”

They also learned to live with the basics. We lived in a modest house in a nice neighborhood, but not a wealthy neighborhood. It was a working class neighborhood, even though I was a psychiatrist. While my medical friends lived in $300K homes, we lived in an $85K townhome. While my medical friends drove the latest model car, we drove a car that was 13-years old, but ran like a charm. When they learned to drive and needed a car, they got a used one. There were budgets for clothes, food, recreation, furniture and even college. There was a weekly family meeting at which this budget was discussed.

When I finally said good-bye to my two grown children to enter religious life, they were shocked when I took them down to the lawyer to sign over my assets to them. They thought all we had was the townhome and the old cars. They never asked for more nor did they expect to get more.

Guess what the first thing they did was?

When our brothers needed a house to care for fathers in crisis pregnancies, which is our primary ministry, we rented one. After a year, my daughter called me and announced that she was flying into town and wanted to meet with my superior. I set up the meeting. She turned to the superior and said, “I noticed that you are renting a house and that your landlord does not want you to bring this dads over here.” He nodded that this was the case. She proceeded, “My father handed us his assets when he entered the community. My brother and I don’t need all of this. Will you do us the honor of letting us buy you a house for this ministry? If you don’t want to own it, because of poverty, my brother and I will own it and you can pay us enough rent to cover the taxes and insurance.” Of course, these was a few dollars copared to the rent that we were paying.

My point is that we can raise families to live evangelical poverty without being destitute.

 

[JReducation]

I can’t speak as an official Franciscan, but I can as an official layman

A lot of voluntary poverty is subjective based on the needs of the person. For example, I have an nine month old son. Although for me I can get away with buying all of my clothes second hand and wear them until they’re threadbare, I’m not going to subject him (or my wife) to the same thing. For them, to live like I do would be a spiritual burden. So I live out my life wearing my simple clothes, eating plain foods, getting the same haircut for the last 16 years.

I do like my video games, and I do have a good desktop computer. These are hobbies, and I still partake in them. But even with this, I don’t rush out and buy things right away. I take my time, I wait awhile. I still have “wants”, but the freedom I have without actually obtaining them is something I love. And it allows me to be able to dedicate more of my resources to ministries I am a part of. Example; rather than buy two new video games, I recently instead bought a cajon (a type of drum). I can use this cajon while doing praise and worship at the Youth Group I help out at, or on retreats,

I’m a simple man, who likes simple things. The concept of voluntary poverty, which some consider to be a spiritual gift, is one that gives so much freedom. If you have this gift, you will find so much joy through it, regardless of others’ opinions. So in this sense, if this is truly what can help bring you closer to the Lord, others’ opinions don’t matter. And really, if they did wonder you could always say “I’m decluttering my life” and they’d probably be cool with it.

I’ve learned one good rule when it comes to families. At the end of the day, there’s only one family member which matters; you spouse. And your kids. Everyone else can deal with it.

ClayPotts is a member of the SFO, maybe she’ll drop by and share some about how Secular Franciscans handle this issue.

Unfortunately, the SFO in the USA is not handling this very well right now. I serve as spiritual assistant to a fraternity and it seems that they do not have a uniform statute on this matter. They made one catastrophic mistake in 1978. They revised their statutes to reflect their secular state. They wanted to ensure that they were not “little friars”. They emphasized their secular state so much that many of their members simply stopped reading Francis and started getting more involved in what I call “general Catholicism”.

While Francis certainly wanted the secular order to nurture the local Church, he did not mean for it to be so blended with the local Church that it was unidentifiable. That’s the problem from which they’re trying to recover. Until the 1970s generation dies out and the younger generation takes over, I don’t foresee them returning to their roots too soon. Some fraternities are moving in that direction.

The fraternity that I work with has a ministry to poor people and they do a great deal for the poor. They work very closely with our brothers in our pregnancy centers. They really sacrifice a lot to serve the poor. This is a collective project for them. Some work hands on and others support the ministry through material assistance. This requires that they sacrifice themselves in order to help those who are less fortunate. Most fraternities do not have such coprorate ministries. They leave it to the individuals to find a ministry. Not everyone finds one where they are required to tighten their belts in order to share their material resources.

I believe that they’ll get there. They have many young people entering who are very austere. This is a good sign not only for the secular orders, but also for the religious orders. Today’s young people seem more inclined to great sacrifices than the Baby Boomers.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[jm0rr0w]

This is a really informative thread I want to read this book now.

there’s something I’ve been thinking about; how many possessions should a lay person have? I would say that I have too many possessions and for a while I thought I should bring the number down, but by how much? It’s easier for the religious because they give away everything. I would like to be generous with God and only keep what I absolutely need, but should I go so far because it might upset my family? I also don’t know if I should give away the things that my family gave me because this might upset them a lot and I don’t want to be uncharitable, but I don’t want to potentially put God second either. I want to be prudent but also not say no to God. I am interested in what the Franciscans would say about this. (Br JR?)

For quite a while I equated the poverty spoken of in the gospels as -not- having a lot of money or material things. I over thought and complicated poverty like I tend to do most things. I tried to formulate what was “to much”. I wanted a black and white answer, something specific. Finally I gave up on such an approach. I found an answer that rang true for me which was much more simple:

Gospel poverty = Total dependence on God

It isn’t all about how much or how little you have. It is to not lose focus on what is truly important, the salvation of yourself, your family, and all. Turning our focus away from that hinders us in living a gospel life. Wanting to possess money, material things, power over others, fame, etc here in this world distracts us from what is far more important and eternal.

This is very hard for me. To die to self and turn to God. To trust in him, not worry, and not get really anxious or apprehensive.

Last year I was at a nearby parish retreat. Father Lawrence Schroedel, CFR was speaking and he said something that really helped me: “We only actually own one thing in our lives. Everything else is created and given to us by God. That one thing is our sin and even God wants to forgive that and take it off our shoulders.” For most of my life I thought of things as mine; that I owned them or was the “master” of them. I think that mindset is reinforced by our society. We are conditioned that to be “successful” we need the best degree, the best job, the best car, the best mate, the best children, an overly big house, and make lots and lots of money. It is so easy to get caught up in that path and to be self-centered and not god-centered. We must be good custodians of all the wonderful gifts and graces from God. To not focus on being major but instead on being minor.

These are a couple passages that help inspire and guide me. Please do not interpret from them solely on their own, but keep them in context of the overall scripture they come from:

(Matt 6:25-34)
"Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about your life, what you shall eat or what you shall drink, nor about your body, what you shall put on. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing? Look at the birds of the air: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? And which of you by being anxious can add one cubit to his span of life? And why are you anxious about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they neither toil nor spin; yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is alive and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will he not much more clothe you, O men of little faith? Therefore do not be anxious, saying, What shall we eat?' or What shall we drink?’ or `What shall we wear?’ For the Gentiles seek all these things; and your heavenly Father knows that you need them all. But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things shall be yours as well. "Therefore do not be anxious about tomorrow, for tomorrow will be anxious for itself. Let the day’s own trouble be sufficient for the day.

(Matt 16:24)
Then Jesus told his disciples, "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.

Pax,
JM

 

[jm0rr0w]

Unfortunately, the SFO in the USA is not handling this very well right now. I serve as spiritual assistant to a fraternity and it seems that they do not have a uniform statute on this matter. They made one catastrophic mistake in 1978. They revised their statutes to reflect their secular state. They wanted to ensure that they were not “little friars”. They emphasized their secular state so much that many of their members simply stopped reading Francis and started getting more involved in what I call “general Catholicism”.

While Francis certainly wanted the secular order to nurture the local Church, he did not mean for it to be so blended with the local Church that it was unidentifiable. That’s the problem from which they’re trying to recover. Until the 1970s generation dies out and the younger generation takes over, I don’t foresee them returning to their roots too soon. Some fraternities are moving in that direction.

The fraternity that I work with has a ministry to poor people and they do a great deal for the poor. They work very closely with our brothers in our pregnancy centers. They really sacrifice a lot to serve the poor. This is a collective project for them. Some work hands on and others support the ministry through material assistance. This requires that they sacrifice themselves in order to help those who are less fortunate. Most fraternities do not have such coprorate ministries. They leave it to the individuals to find a ministry. Not everyone finds one where they are required to tighten their belts in order to share their material resources.

I believe that they’ll get there. They have many young people entering who are very austere. This is a good sign not only for the secular orders, but also for the religious orders. Today’s young people seem more inclined to great sacrifices than the Baby Boomers.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

I’ve been an inquirer to the SFO for over two years. In that time I’ve seen a big change in the region I’m in. There is now a greater focus on formation and fraternity apostolate(s). The changes in my opinion are all for the better. When I first began discernment the formation was lackidasical and unorganized. People didn’t participate in apostolate work. I believe some thought of the fraternity as a social club not a vocation.

I can attest that things are changing. Formation for orientation, inquiry, and candidacy is more formal with required curriculum. Participants must now actually demonstrate understanding by reading from and about Sts. Francis and Clare, writing papers, answering questions about the rule and constitution, keeping a scripture journal, etc.

The focus on apostolate(s) is a struggle here in the southeast US. Many in the fraternity live very far apart so it is hard for us all to come together and jointly work. We do come together on some occasions but it would be great if it could be done more as a whole fraternity and more often.

Pax,
JM

 

[JReducation]

I’ve been an inquirer to the SFO for over two years. In that time I’ve seen a big change in the region I’m in. There is now a greater focus on formation and fraternity apostolate(s). The changes in my opinion are all for the better. When I first began discernment the formation was lackidasical and unorganized. People didn’t participate in apostolate work. I believe some thought of the fraternity as a social club not a vocation.

I can attest that things are changing. Formation for orientation, inquiry, and candidacy is more formal with required curriculum. Participants must now actually demonstrate understanding by reading from and about Sts. Francis and Clare, writing papers, answering questions about the rule and constitution, keeping a scripture journal, etc.

The focus on apostolate(s) is a struggle here in the southeast US. Many in the fraternity live very far apart so it is hard for us all to come together and jointly work. We do come together on some occasions but it would be great if it could be done more as a whole fraternity and more often.

Pax,
JM

Sounds like you’re seeing what I’m seeing. The transition from a loosely knit group to a cohesive fraternity.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Melchior_1]

Unfortunately, the SFO in the USA is not handling this very well right now. I serve as spiritual assistant to a fraternity and it seems that they do not have a uniform statute on this matter. They made one catastrophic mistake in 1978. They revised their statutes to reflect their secular state. They wanted to ensure that they were not “little friars”. They emphasized their secular state so much that many of their members simply stopped reading Francis and started getting more involved in what I call “general Catholicism”.

While Francis certainly wanted the secular order to nurture the local Church, he did not mean for it to be so blended with the local Church that it was unidentifiable. That’s the problem from which they’re trying to recover. Until the 1970s generation dies out and the younger generation takes over, I don’t foresee them returning to their roots too soon. Some fraternities are moving in that direction.

The fraternity that I work with has a ministry to poor people and they do a great deal for the poor. They work very closely with our brothers in our pregnancy centers. They really sacrifice a lot to serve the poor. This is a collective project for them. Some work hands on and others support the ministry through material assistance. This requires that they sacrifice themselves in order to help those who are less fortunate. Most fraternities do not have such coprorate ministries. They leave it to the individuals to find a ministry. Not everyone finds one where they are required to tighten their belts in order to share their material resources.

I believe that they’ll get there. They have many young people entering who are very austere. This is a good sign not only for the secular orders, but also for the religious orders. Today’s young people seem more inclined to great sacrifices than the Baby Boomers.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

In Canada I’m seeing something similar happening. When I inquired about the SFO, the gentleman told me that to get involved it would require time, sacrifice, and energy. I have these, but it would have conflicted with my parish work. Essentially, the fellow was telling me that part of joining with the greater family is that I would need to dedicate myself to the ideals of that family, and focus on that family This was one of the reasons why I was so hesitant to join, because I still feel that God is calling me to work within the Parish I’m at.

Contrast this with the Lay Dominicans, who in Ontario are also starting to try and make a comeback. I was told that, yes, community was important. But the big things were bringing Dominican spirituality to your parish, and getting involved in ministries that Dominicans would do (RCIA, youth ministry, sacramental education, Rosaries misc etc). Still a family (you’re still a Dominican, complete with the “OP”], but living out the vocation is still different than you would with the SFO.