TOSF Question

  • Thread starter Thread starter Luigi_Daniele
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Luigi_Daniele

Guest
The SSPX has a Franciscan Third Order (Third Order Pentinents of St Francis–TOSF).

A question (assuming that their will be reconciliation of the SSPX with the Church–yes, I know, let’s assume anyway 😉 ):

how will the TOSF be handled? Will they be allowed to continue, or merged with the OSF?
 
Luigi_Daniele said:
The SSPX has a Franciscan Third Order (Third Order Pentinents of St Francis–TOSF).

A question (assuming that their will be reconciliation of the SSPX with the Church–yes, I know, let’s assume anyway 😉 ):

how will the TOSF be handled? Will they be allowed to continue, or merged with the OSF?
Click to expand...
As the OSF is a true secular order within the Church they will either have to reconcile with it or modify their name.

Just as the Transpline Redemptorists became the Sons of the Most Holy Redeemer.
 
A follow up, if I may.

I have often wondered why (I’ll use the Franciscans as an example) there can be a billion different “flavors” among the 1st and 2nd orders, but there can only be one, “one size fits all” organization within the 3rd order.

Can someone please enlighten me? :o
 
Luigi_Daniele said:
A follow up, if I may.

I have often wondered why (I’ll use the Franciscans as an example) there can be a billion different “flavors” among the 1st and 2nd orders, but there can only be one, “one size fits all” organization within the 3rd order.

Can someone please enlighten me? :o
Click to expand...
There are, in fact, many “flavors” of Franciscan third orders. I have no idea how many orders of sisters there are. For men there is the Third Order Regular (TOR). And then of course there’s the Secular Franciscans for laypeople and secular clergy. What sort of third order is the TOSF, regular or secular?
 
Perhaps they could be affiliated with the Third Order Regular of St. Francis (TOR Franciscans).
 
ByzCath said:
TOR is a clerical order and not an order of laity and other seculars.
Click to expand...
I thought the TOSF was also at least made up of of vowed religious more like the TORs, but maybe I was mistaken.
 
Aelred_Minor said:
I thought the TOSF was also at least made up of of vowed religious more like the TORs, but maybe I was mistaken.
Click to expand...
Yes they do have vowed religious.

The TOSF do not have vowed religious. They are like the Secular Franciscans. Like the Third Order Dominicans or Third Order Carmelites or Secular Discalced Carmelites.
 
ByzCath said:
As the OSF is a true secular order within the Church they will either have to reconcile with it or modify their name.

Just as the Transpline Redemptorists became the Sons of the Most Holy Redeemer.
Click to expand...
I don’t think it’s quite so clear. The example of the Transalpine Redemptorist is a good one as there has been some misinformation concerning what they had to do. In particular, they were not required to give up the name Redemptorist. Here is a snip from a post by one of their Fathers addressing this:
FrMM said:
  1. The Church never demanded that we return to the Redemptorist Congregation. This was never asked of us nor even hinted at in any form.
2.The Redemptorist Superior General at the time never asked us to vow obedience to him nor accept their Constitutions; again, not in any way at all. It simply never happened.
  1. We never presented our Constitutions to the Sacred Congregation of Religious for approval nor did they approve the document in a few months.
  2. We did not have to wait for permission to receive new members; this was never communicated to us, in fact we were encouraged to continue as we had done before our reconciliation of 18 June 2008.
5. We have not, as it turns out, had to renounce the name Redemptorist; we thought it was an obligation, and if it was necessary we would have obeyed. Still, we are not the Congregation of the Most Holy Redeemer, (C.SS.R.), and make no claim to being that body, calling ourselves the Sons of the Most Holy Redeemer, (F.SS.R.) or popularly known as the "Transalpine Redemptorists."
  1. We did modify our habit.
With every blessing
Fr. Michael Mary, F.SS.R.
Click to expand...
 
Luigi_Daniele said:
The SSPX has a Franciscan Third Order (Third Order Pentinents of St Francis–TOSF).

A question (assuming that their will be reconciliation of the SSPX with the Church–yes, I know, let’s assume anyway 😉 ):

how will the TOSF be handled? Will they be allowed to continue, or merged with the OSF?
Click to expand...
You’re talking about the third order lay group within the SSPX, right? That’s been discussed elsewhere on this board, but the short answer is that it’s currently an unapproved association of the faithful. It has no links with either the Secular Franciscan Order, the TOR, or the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life in Rome.
 
ByzCath said:
TOR is a clerical order and not an order of laity and other seculars.
Click to expand...
The TOR are consecrated religious but they are not a clerical order. They do make vows, whereas Secular Franciscans make promises. The TOR does contain some priests, but there are also many non-ordained friars which is normal for the Franciscan men’s orders.

The SSPX Third Order group is an unapproved association of the faithful at this point, and I believe that it consists mostly of laypeople, led by an SSPX priest. They do not use an historical Franciscan rule, but one of their own written by the SSPX sometime in the last 30 years or so. sspx.org/Third_Order/third_order_rule.pdf

As they’re currently constructed, they really aren’t Franciscan except in name.
 
iloveangels said:
The TOR are consecrated religious but they are not a clerical order. They do make vows, whereas Secular Franciscans make promises. The TOR does contain some priests, but there are also many non-ordained friars which is normal for the Franciscan men’s orders.

The SSPX Third Order group is an unapproved association of the faithful at this point, and I believe that it consists mostly of laypeople, led by an SSPX priest. They do not use an historical Franciscan rule, but one of their own written by the SSPX sometime in the last 30 years or so. sspx.org/Third_Order/third_order_rule.pdf

As they’re currently constructed, they really aren’t Franciscan except in name.
Click to expand...
As a professed OFS (that’s our designation, in accordance with the Latin name of the Order), I would say the above comment is close to the mark. If the TOSF of SSPX wishes to be considered “Third Order Franciscan” (whether Regular or Secular), they will either be required as a body to be incorporated (likely under the 1978 Pauline Rule), or as individuals to be admitted to established fraternities. The easiest time will probably be for those members who were already professed at the time they joined up with the SSPX. Hope this is a useful perspective.
 
I just had a chance to review the “Rule” in question. I see nothing “Franciscan” in it at all. It expresses devotion to SSPX guidelines, not to any manifestation of the Third Order of St Francis:shrug:
 
Brother JR has addressed this question (now to find it :eek: )

The SSPX branch has no legal standing. If one of their members was previously professed as OFS (SFO) they would have to “face the music” in order to be reconciled back into the Order. But recall that disobedience for a Franciscan is a very Big deal. In reality this would be a case by case situation and no blanket statement will really work.
 
On a different note and because my mind is working slow today 😃

Opinion: I really can’t imagine very many if any of the “Franciscan 3rd” of the SSPX really wanting to ever return to the modern 3rd Order Rule and and specially OSF (SFO). If anything they would feel closer to the two groups who follow the previous 3rd Order Rule.
 
tonydoc said:
I just had a chance to review the “Rule” in question. I see nothing “Franciscan” in it at all. It expresses devotion to SSPX guidelines, not to any manifestation of the Third Order of St Francis:shrug:
Click to expand...
You’re right, Tony. It’s not Franciscan. Franciscans get misunderstood all the time. It’s a label they’ve decided to use.

Kevin812, they’re currently not using anything that even remotely resembles a Franciscan rule. There are other lay organizations besides the SFO that use a Franciscan rule–aka BSP etc. that they could join if what they really want is something generally in the Franciscan family but don’t like the SFO. And it’s possible they might even manage to put together one of their own, but the Church almost certainly isn’t going to approve something claiming to be Franciscan that’s really an SSPX helpers group–more or less a clerically focused altar society–and not Franciscan at all.
 
Kevin812 said:
On a different note and because my mind is working slow today 😃

Opinion: I really can’t imagine very many if any of the “Franciscan 3rd” of the SSPX really wanting to ever return to the modern 3rd Order Rule and and specially OSF (SFO). If anything they would feel closer to the two groups who follow the previous 3rd Order Rule.
Click to expand...
kevin812, i suspect we may be in agreement. Let us suppose, however, that some traditionalist tertiaries actually wish to reconcile with Rome and celebrate the EF liturgy. The real challenge I think they may find is that they will be expected to take greater responsibility for their spirituality, their Franciscan identity and their general governance. For instance, whereas in the past, fraternities were grouped according to the obedience that sponsored them (e.g. Observant, Conventual, Capuchin, TOR), they are now grouped into geographic regions answerable to each other, with each region answering to each other under the umbrella of a National Fraternity.

Some older Tertiaries may have entered, thinking the Third Order was a sort of “religious who didn’t make it” group. Whatever their motives, many in our fraternity (which recently celebrated its 125th birthday) managed to make the transition under the Pauline Rule–I regularly meet people at fraternity gatherings who have been professed more that 40, 50, even 60 years!

I can see a place for traditionalists within the Pauline Rule, perhaps as individual fraternities or even as traditionalist regions with spiritual assistants who are not adverse to celebrating the EF. Some aspects, of course, will have to be non-negotiables: (1) acceptance of the decrees of Vatican 2, (2) full obedience to the person of of the Roman Pontiff, and (3) spiritual focus on being Franciscan.AND Catholic (A good guidebook here, which stresses the unique nature of “secular” spirituality, is An Introduction to the Devout Life by Francis de Sales, himself a Franciscan cordbearer.)

Of course, this is but my own set of ideas. Any (name removed by moderator)ut? 👍

Pax et bonum,

Tony, OFS from Detroit
 
tonydoc said:
kevin812, i suspect we may be in agreement. Let us suppose, however, that some traditionalist tertiaries actually wish to reconcile with Rome and celebrate the EF liturgy. The real challenge I think they may find is that they will be expected to take greater responsibility for their spirituality, their Franciscan identity and their general governance. For instance, whereas in the past, fraternities were grouped according to the obedience that sponsored them (e.g. Observant, Conventual, Capuchin, TOR), they are now grouped into geographic regions answerable to each other, with each region answering to each other under the umbrella of a National Fraternity.

Some older Tertiaries may have entered, thinking the Third Order was a sort of “religious who didn’t make it” group. Whatever their motives, many in our fraternity (which recently celebrated its 125th birthday) managed to make the transition under the Pauline Rule–I regularly meet people at fraternity gatherings who have been professed more that 40, 50, even 60 years!

I can see a place for traditionalists within the Pauline Rule, perhaps as individual fraternities or even as traditionalist regions with spiritual assistants who are not adverse to celebrating the EF. Some aspects, of course, will have to be non-negotiables: (1) acceptance of the decrees of Vatican 2, (2) full obedience to the person of of the Roman Pontiff, and (3) spiritual focus on being Franciscan.AND Catholic (A good guidebook here, which stresses the unique nature of “secular” spirituality, is An Introduction to the Devout Life by Francis de Sales, himself a Franciscan cordbearer.)

Of course, this is but my own set of ideas. Any (name removed by moderator)ut? 👍

Pax et bonum,

Tony, OFS from Detroit
Click to expand...
We’re moving toward more standardized formation in the US, albeit slowly. It’s necessary now that we are united into a global order. That’s probably not going to go away. But if they can deal with that, and they can learn to be Franciscan instead of a priest’s helpers group, which is what they are now, then I see no problem with their desire to be orthodox and traditonal, none at all. Truth be told, there are already many orthodox traditional older people in some of the local fraternities. The order is certainly big enough for everyone who has a vocation to it.

[PS I’m OFS too.]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top