With all due respect and kindness, I wish to suggest some things to you.
I do formation work. If I had a young man speaking the way that you write, it would send up all kinds of red flags in my mind. It sounds as if you are parroting the saints of old. This was their manner of writing. I’m not even sure that they actually spoke this way in day to day conversation. My guess, from what I’ve studied, is that they were pretty plain spoken people. Even someone like St. Francis, who was a poet, wrote very poetically, but spoke in very practical and everyday language.
For example, you said,* “He already imprinted a YES on my soul, who am i to say NO?”* Even the poetic St.Francis of Assisi or St. John of the Cross would not speak this way in daily intercourse with other Catholics. This may be found in one of their spiritual writings. In everyday exchange they would probably say something such as, “I’m willing to give whatever God asks of me.” To the trained ear of a formation director, this does not sound like the typical manner of speaking of a young man. This would concern him, because this young man has to live in a community of brothers where he has to communicate and integrate with them, not stand out by his manner of speech or external expressions of zeal.
Zeal is always good, but the religious must always fit in with his community. If the manner and language is too different from that of his brothers, integration is almost impossible. It is different when God singles out the individual as in the case of the mystics. Even they did not like it. St. Teresa of Jesus always said, “Lord, you have a way of showing up at the most inopportune moments,” when she had a mystical experience in front of all her sisters. She was embarrassed. Francis of Assisi only spoke to Brother Leo about his stigmata and commanded him not to speak about it until after he was dead. They knew that he had the stigmata and that something wonderful had happened, but Francis went about with life as usual or as usual as he could given his poor health at that time. Do you get the idea?
To be a religious, you must be simple. Simplicity means that one blends in with one’s community. When we enter religious life we must remember that it is we who are joining the community. The community is not joining us. Therefore, it is we who must adjust how we speak, work, act and do many things to fit into the daily life of the community. A religious who does not fit into the daily life of the community is destined to be very lonely. Community life is not for loneliness. On the contrary, it should be a foretaste of heaven.
My second piece of advice is be aware of how you say that you want to be a religious brother. You said, “I
just want to be a religious brother.”
The “just” in that sentence is a point of contention is most religious communities today. There are all kinds of brothers. Some are choir monks, some are priests, some are lay brothers, some are apostolic brothers, some are coadjutor brothers, some are friars and so forth. Each makes his contribution to the Church. There was a period between Vatican I and Vatican II when the non ordained brothers were treated exactly as you are saying. The ordained and the laity would say to them, “You’re JUST a brother.” They took away their rights to vote in community, to pray with their community, to sit at the same table to eat with priests, to have friends among the laity, to go to school unless they were going to teach, to speak unless they were spoken to, to pray in the same chapel as priests and seminarians.
It was such a horrible segregation that the Church intervened at Vatican II and issued Perfectae Caritatis and Bl. John Paul II intervened again and issued Vita Consacrata. Both documents restored the brothers to their rightful place in the Church and the community, restored their rights and emphatically dictated to the laity and to the clergy that the brother is an essential part of the Church, not JUST a brother. Without him, the Church misses a grace that can only come through the presence of the brother and a lot of apostolic works will die without the brother. Bl. John Paul makes this very clear in Vita Consacrata.
Some brothers are scholars and some are beggars. Some are handymen and some are superiors of houses. One was even elected pope (long story for another thread). The self-deprecating, “I just want to be a brother” will send more red flags up. A more correct way would be to say “I believe that I’m called to religious life, but not to the priesthood.” Said that way, you’re making a distinction between the two callings without making one inferior to the other.
To recap, try to speak as a person you age would speak. One can be virtuous in speech and be very typical at the same time. If you want an example, study Bl. Pierre Giorgio Frassatti. The boy had a wonderful sense of humor. Before he died, instead of saying some very pious words he asked one of his friends to take a note. He started, “On Monday, take care of this. On Tues don’t forget that Mrs X needs this. On Thurs there are the kids at CCD, etc etc.” St. Francis of Asisi, as he lay dying told Br. Leo, “Write this down.” He proceeded to give his brothers one final scolding, not very pious language at all. That was his final testament.
Try to separate the vocation to religious life and the vocation to Holy Orders. See them as different, not on a ladder. They’re not. They are very different and one does not depend on the other. Yet, they need each other.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
Many are teachers, administrators, social workers, counselors, and other white collar jobs. If the man belongs to the FSSP, it would be up to the FSSP superior to decide if he can continue to chop wood and work in a parish on weekends. That’s the kind of thing that you would see more among religious, than secular priests.
