What are the reasons for shortage of new Religious Sisters?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sister_Helena
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
As I posted somewhere else, about religious communities in general, I can extrapolate from there and apply to active women religious in the USA at least. I’ll give a simple example that is probably very common in many other congregations of women religious.

In the 1800s St. John Neumann needed religious women to run schools and hospitals for the increasing number of immigrant poor. He set out to found religious congregations. He founded the Sisters of St. Francis (OSF). Why a Redemptorist bishop would found Franciscan congregation is beyond me and a topic for another thread. However, after working alongside some of these sisters, I found that they were as Franciscan as Jesuits. They had no clue who St. Francis really was. They did not follow the Franciscan rule. They had a constitution written by their general chapter and some statutes written by their first mother superior. Needless to say, they were part of a religious family without being part of it. In other words, they were completely disconnected from the founder of that family. They were connected to their ministry, teaching and nursing. Everything revolved around their apostolate. I would dare guess that many active communities of women religious built their lives around their apostolate.

As the apostolate expanded they became scattered. When you are not grounded in a founder and his vision of religious life, his vision of the Gospel, the Church and the common life, but instead your are grounded on a the work that you do, then you run the risk of identifying yourself by what you do, not by who you are. This has happened to many congregations of women religious.

The perfect example was given by the one poster who said that her friend, who is a Franciscan Sister, does not wear the Franciscan habit so that she can be less noticeable. In plain Franciscan language, that’s rubbish. No one enjoyed being more noticeable as Francis of Assisi. He wanted people to notice him, because when they noticed him, they would learn the Gospel and follow his example. Francis deliberately walked through towns just to be seen. This was his idea of preaching by being very present and very observable. But if you don’t know your founder and his or her mind, then you can’t emulate them. You can’t reproduce their sanctity and their effectiveness.

Another problem with women religious in the USA has been loss of leadership. How many religious communities of women still have a Mother Superior? I’m sorry, but a President does not quite carry the same authority as Superior. A president is the leader of a country.or the head of a corporation. Congregations are not corporations and sisters are not share holders. You need someone who will call everyone back to their focus when people start to drift in different directions. That person must have some power.

It’s very interesting that the President of the United States is the President to civilians, but the Commander In Chief to the Armed Forces. Why is that? Because the term commander implies that this is not a democratic organization. Once you enter the Armed Forces you have a commander. You do not choose. You do not vote on where to strike next. You do not decide how to spend money. You do not decide where you’re going to live and work. That makes for a safe environment for everyone and a smooth organism. The democratic nonsense is left for the civilians who have nothing better to do than argue and debate all day long. Those entrusted with the lives and safety of a nation are not in a position where we want to give them the time and opportunity to “discern.”

The life of a religious sisters should be about saving souls. The salvation of souls is as imperative as the salvation of lives. When souls are threatened, we don’t have the luxury of sitting around discussing the identity of the religious woman or her needs and wants. The The founders gave them a way of life and a ministry. The only discussion should be strategic planning.

Again, I’ll go back to the American Franciscan Sisters and compare them to their counterparts, the Franciscan Sisters and nuns who have Franciscan succession. The American Franciscan sisters have spent time, money and human resources trying to discover who they are. Now they didn’t have anything left to spare for the souls entrusted to their care. There was no central authority to say, “This conversation is over.”

The sisters and nuns who came from the Franciscan tradition didn’t have these conversations. They came directly down from the line of St. Francis. Everything that had to be said about their identity, their mission, community life, prayer life, apostolate, internal organization, and relationship to the Church was said by St. Francis in 1221 when he wrote the Rule for the Brothers and Sisters of Penance. The rule does not allow for any deviation or any disobedience to the wishes of Francis. Every superior elected after his death had one job, to ensure that Francis’ vision was kept alive and that he was obeyed in all things. The only areas that were open to discussion and modification were those that Francis himself said could be modified. The things that he said were untouchable. There is a direct line of authority and vision between the founder and the current superiors.

American and European women religious took democracy and turned it from a gift to an addiction. Everything had to be voted on and everything had to be liked by everyone. If you didn’t like something it was OK to do it your way. The result is that many congregations of women religious do not look like religious communities. They look like professional sororities of Catholic women.

There are other problems too, but they don’t fit into this post. Sisters need to recover the vision of their founders and reinstate authority in their congregations.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
JR-you hit it on the head! Bravo! 👍

I know about one community of Franciscan Sisters which came from the ‘Neumann foundation’. They were the only Sisters I knew growing up, I went to public school, but for religious instructions I went to the parish school that was nearest my home for classes, which were taught by these Sisters.

They were in many of the parish schools of my Upstate NY diocese, and founded the two Catholic hospitals that are still around-although I think one of them is run by either a layman or a laicized priest.

This community had to merge in recent years with two other Franciscan groups because the numbers have gone down so drastically. Hardly anyone wears any sort of habit, much less a veil. They have gotten away from their original apostolates * of teaching and nursing and have gone into things like the environment and ‘social justice’. One of their early members, who was brought up in my hometown, was beatified in 2005 in the hope that she would ‘attract vocations’. Well, I wonder what she would think of her fellow sisters these days! [and I’m with you, JR-I can’t stand it when these liberal congregations call their leaders ‘President’ instead of ‘Mother Superior’]

But you were ‘on target’ there, JR-and much more eloquent and decisive than I would ever be!*
 
barb_finnegan said:
JR-you hit it on the head! Bravo! 👍

I know about one community of Franciscan Sisters which came from the ‘Neumann foundation’. They were the only Sisters I knew growing up, I went to public school, but for religious instructions I went to the parish school that was nearest my home for classes, which were taught by these Sisters.

They were in many of the parish schools of my Upstate NY diocese, and founded the two Catholic hospitals that are still around-although I think one of them is run by either a layman or a laicized priest.

This community had to merge in recent years with two other Franciscan groups because the numbers have gone down so drastically. Hardly anyone wears any sort of habit, much less a veil. They have gotten away from their original apostolates * of teaching and nursing and have gone into things like the environment and ‘social justice’. One of their early members, who was brought up in my hometown, was beatified in 2005 in the hope that she would ‘attract vocations’. Well, I wonder what she would think of her fellow sisters these days! [and I’m with you, JR-I can’t stand it when these liberal congregations call their leaders ‘President’ instead of ‘Mother Superior’]

But you were ‘on target’ there, JR-and much more eloquent and decisive than I would ever be!*

I know the Franciscan sisters of whom you speak. They are not part of the Franciscan line of succession. That is the Neumann foundation. There is the Neumann group of Franciscans who were founded by the dear bishop and given the rule of St. Francis written for the Third Order Franciscans. The Third Order Franciscans were founded by St. Francis and Clare. We are divided into three groups: friars, sisters and seculars. But we all follow the same rule. The difference is that the friars and sisters life in community, with a superior. The Seculars belong to a community, have a superior, but do not live in the same house. They meet every few weeks and they work in shared ministries. By the way, ministry was a word that was instituted by Francis of Assisi because he did not like the word apostolate. LOL In fact, the male Franciscan superiors are not called such. They are called Ministers. The Protestants stole that title from the Franciscans.

Back to the point, the American born group put aside the rule of St. Francis, because they really did not enter the religious life to follow Francis. They were tryiing to meet a need in the American Church at the time. But in so doing, they shot themselves in the foot. When you don’t have a founding document, then you don’t have a mission statement that is stable and permanent. Your mission statement is subject to change every time there is a chapter and new leadership. This is one of the problems that women religious are facing. There is too much changing of the mission statment.

I was reading one on lne, not Franciscan, but another group. I was amazed when I read that their mission was to promote the development of women according to the plan of the Creator. I almost wanted to write back and inform them that Jesus called the Creator, Father. And that Jesus’ largest number of followers have always been women. If I had had a snapshot of the crucifixion I would have been able to prove my point. Women religious seem to have done better than most women. They were always better educated. They had job security. They did not have abusive husbands. They had financial stability. They ran their own homes. They ran their own institutions. They never had to raise children or worry about them, yet they were “mothers” to thousands of kids. Until recent history, they were always protected by a religous order of men. It is true that they had to submit to the authority of men who ran the Church, but so did every other woman, along with submitting to their husbands and fathers.

Naturally, when I read that piece in their mission statement I wanted to shout back all the aboe and remind them that the development of women is a very exclusive ministry. But as much as I talked to the screen, no one responded. :confused:

This is an aside, but it’s a funny annecdote. When I was working with the Franciscan Sisters (Neumann’s group) one of them asked me what I thought about my new assignment. I had just been asked to leave my school and go to Rome to get another degree. I said something to the effect, “That’s what my superior wants.” She kept asking me what my feelings on it were. I responded, “A friar is not a person who has feelings or personal opinions about what he’s told to do. The only feelings that the Rule of St. Francis allow us to have are those of loving obedience.” She retorted, “That’s an immature way of living.” I was a little stunned, because I thought that every religioius community accepted obedience the same way that we did. To me it was not immature. I was an adult and a professional man when I entered the order. I knew exactly what I was in for. I still can’t figure out what the surprise is among some people when they enter religious life and authority tells them to do or not do something.

Oh well, maybe I missed something somewhere along the line.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
Click to expand...
 
What a good post JR, as always.

In fact, that’s what the Franciscan group is called now in my diocese: "Sisters of the Third Order of St. Francis of the Neumann Communities’ . Quite a mouthful, isn’t it?

‘Minister’-that’s what the head sister is called.

You had quite a snippy encounter with one of them, didn’t you? I mean she was snippy-not you 😃 .

I hope I’m not hijacking this thread, Sister Helena-it’s just that our friend JR here has a lot of interesting insights.
 
To summarize so far, the common denominator for the slow rise in vocation is identity-crisis among some Religious Orders themselves, which fail to convince others of the relevance of their existence. Others mentioned lack of authentic visibility which can be partly accomplished by the religious habit. Then the lack of authentic joy which manifests itself in subtle (and not so subtle) ways. Someone mentioned the increasing number of small families which do not allow women to pursue their true desires because they have to care for parents. Is there anything else I missed?
 
Sister_Helena said:
To summarize so far, the common denominator for the slow rise in vocation is identity-crisis among some Religious Orders themselves, which fail to convince others of the relevance of their existence. Others mentioned lack of authentic visibility which can be partly accomplished by the religious habit. Then the lack of authentic joy which manifests itself in subtle (and not so subtle) ways. Someone mentioned the increasing number of small families which do not allow women to pursue their true desires because they have to care for parents. Is there anything else I missed?
Click to expand...
I would add the absence of authority and the absence of a fixed mission statement. The mission statement has to be grounded in the vision of the founder and it should be respected as law by the members of the a community. Obedience is critical and I’m not talking about negotiating or this motion that some people have of obedience to God’s will without a superor to mediate.

If I may offer an example from the Brothers of Life. Our philsophy is very simple. Francis is the voice of Christ and as such he is loved and revered by all. The Ministers are his successors. They are his voice today. We obey with little or no discussion. Well that’s not totally true. The Minister does a lot of talking. The rest of us do a lot of listening, LOL.

We need to return to this. Young people do not want an easy life. They want a challenge to their souls and their minds.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
If I may comment on Obedience: The spirit of Vatican II, and in Perfecta Caritatis, dialogue between the Superior and the individual Sister, which I think is good and proper, is encouraged. In the Rule of Carmel, a Prioress is defined as “first among the many,” which is different from the notion of an Abbott or Abbess. As such, consultation is frequent in my Community. But dialogue is only a means to an end. It is not an end in itself. It fosters openness and confident participation in the life of community. But the final authority rests on the local Superior. If I may quote from “Starting Afresh from Christ- the Consecrated Life in the Third Milennium”: - “A personal and confident participation in the community’s life and mission is required of all its members. Even if, in the end, according to proper law, it is the task of authority to make choices and decisions, daily living in community requires a participation which allows for the exercise of dialogue and discernment. Each individual, then, and the whole community can work out their own life with the plan of God, together carrying out God’s Will. Co-responsibility and participation are also exercised even in various types of councils at various levels, in order to ensure the constant presence of the Lord who enlightens and guides.”- page 18 “The Task of Superiors”
Now I agree that this was taken to extremes by some so that Religious life is reduced to democratic living. Religious life is not a democracy. We don’t (or should not) operate by popular votes Sometimes dialogue has become a crutch for Superiors not assuming full responsibility and accountability for decisions to be made, and members of community have used this idea as an excuse to pursue their own wills. But healthy and mature dialogues make community living fruitful and productive both collectively and personally. This is one genius of Vatican II that has been misunderstood, manipulated and abused.
 
Sister_Helena said:
Now I agree that this was taken to extremes by some so that Religious life is reduced to democratic living. Religious life is not a democracy. We don’t (or should not) operate by popular votes Sometimes dialogue has become a crutch for Superiors not assuming full responsibility and accountability for decisions to be made, and members of community have used this idea as an excuse to pursue their own wills. But healthy and mature dialogues make community living fruitful and productive both collectively and personally. This is one genius of Vatican II that has been misunderstood, manipulated and abused.
Click to expand...
The bold is mine.

This is not really a genius of Vatican II. This dates back to the first millenium of the Church. The ancient religious orders have always had what we call the chapter. There have always been the local chapter which takes place within a house. It is supposed to happen at least once a month, the provincial chapter which happens at least once every three years, and the general chapter which usually happens every six years in the ancient communities.

The chapter is the vehicle where people engage in interactive discussion, discernment and planning. In the older communities, once the chapter has spoken, it is the role of the superior to enforce it and the role of the individuals to obey. This is what I’m talking about.

Too often there is this capitular dialogue, but there is no authority to enforce the conclusions and no obligation to obey them. This is where religious life is threatened.

Deomocracy was always a part of religious lfie. Superiors and councils were always elected. Constitutions were always voted on. The only absolute in the orders has been the rule.

I know that in our religious family, the rule is never up for revision. Let’s talk about the sisters. They cannot revise the rule, nor can they write anything into the constitution that is in conflict with the rule. But they do have a monthly house chapter where there is that interaction between the Minister and the community. When necessary, there is one-on-one dialgoue between the minister and the religious. But the rule is very explicit. The Minister is the voice of Christ. When the conversation is over, the religious submits to the authority and judgment of the minister and the Miniser receives her inspiration from the chatper, the rule and the constitutions…

The Council encouraged fraternal dialogue to open up the possibility for greater action of the Holy Spirit. It did not encourage the abolition of authority. You’re very right, Sister. The position has been that each community governs according to common law. For the laity who may not know, common law means the constitutions of the community. What some communities have tried to do is to redefine obedience as a private relationship beween Christ and the individual religious. It has encouraged these religious to go looking for God’s will outside of their structure.

It is true that God’s will for us is communicated through many ways; but we cannot leave behind the structure of religious life and the Church. That would be secularism.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
This is not really a genius of Vatican II. This dates back to the first millenium of the Church. The ancient religious orders have always had what we call the chapter. There have always been the local chapter which takes place within a house. It is supposed to happen at least once a month, the provincial chapter which happens at least once every three years, and the general chapter which usually happens every six years in the ancient communities.
I do not mean the Chapter here. I mean the daily issues that do come up, even sometimes transfers to another place. It used to be that one is told when to go and where to go and what to do. There is now a consideration given to the Sisters personal skills and interests when considering a transfer so as to enhance one’s ability to serve God according to one’s God-given talents. It was never like that before Vatican II.
The chapter is the vehicle where people engage in interactive discussion, discernment and planning. In the older communities, once the chapter has spoken, it is the role of the superior to enforce it and the role of the individuals to obey. This is what I’m talking about.
This is still the rule in my Community.
Deomocracy was always a part of religious lfie. Superiors and councils were always elected. Constitutions were always voted on. The only absolute in the orders has been the rule.
I agree with you here. But again, I am not referring to the Government structure and operations . I am alluding to group decisions which compromise the norms of the Constitutions. They cannot be up for majority votes. I also refer to statements like “it’s not fair,” or “if everybody wants it then we should have it” mentality.
I know that in our religious family, the rule is never up for revision. Let’s talk about the sisters. They cannot revise the rule, nor can they write anything into the constitution that is in conflict with the rule. But they do have a monthly house chapter where there is that interaction between the Minister and the community. When necessary, there is one-on-one dialgoue between the minister and the religious. But the rule is very explicit. The Minister is the voice of Christ. When the conversation is over, the religious submits to the authority and judgment of the minister and the Miniser receives her inspiration from the chatper, the rule and the constitutions…
Yes,we agree here. The local Prioress (title in my Community) is the "steward of the Holy Rule and Constitutions.) It is her main responsibility that the Rule and Constitutions are adhered to even though each individual Sister is accountable to God in obeying what she has freely consented to by virtue of her vows.
It is true that God’s will for us is communicated through many ways; but we cannot leave behind the structure of religious life and the Church. That would be secularism.
***Yes, I fully agree. It is part of the whole mystery of religious obedience. We obey in faith that God’s will, for a consecrated Religious, is embodied in the essentials and structure of religious life and in the Church through the voice of the legitimate Superior.

I’m sorry, JR, for my way of responding in this manner of lines. I still have not learned how to multi-quotes!***
 
Sister_Helena said:
This is not really a genius of Vatican II. This dates back to the first millenium of the Church. The ancient religious orders have always had what we call the chapter. There have always been the local chapter which takes place within a house. It is supposed to happen at least once a month, the provincial chapter which happens at least once every three years, and the general chapter which usually happens every six years in the ancient communities.
I do not mean the Chapter here. I mean the daily issues that do come up, even sometimes transfers to another place. It used to be that one is told when to go and where to go and what to do. There is now a consideration given to the Sisters personal skills and interests when considering a transfer so as to enhance one’s ability to serve God according to one’s God-given talents. It was never like that before Vatican II.
The chapter is the vehicle where people engage in interactive discussion, discernment and planning. In the older communities, once the chapter has spoken, it is the role of the superior to enforce it and the role of the individuals to obey. This is what I’m talking about.
This is still the rule in my Community.
Deomocracy was always a part of religious lfie. Superiors and councils were always elected. Constitutions were always voted on. The only absolute in the orders has been the rule.
I agree with you here. But again, I am not referring to the Government structure and operations . I am alluding to group decisions which compromise the norms of the Constitutions. They cannot be up for majority votes. I also refer to statements like “it’s not fair,” or “if everybody wants it then we should have it” mentality.
I know that in our religious family, the rule is never up for revision. Let’s talk about the sisters. They cannot revise the rule, nor can they write anything into the constitution that is in conflict with the rule. But they do have a monthly house chapter where there is that interaction between the Minister and the community. When necessary, there is one-on-one dialgoue between the minister and the religious. But the rule is very explicit. The Minister is the voice of Christ. When the conversation is over, the religious submits to the authority and judgment of the minister and the Miniser receives her inspiration from the chatper, the rule and the constitutions…
Yes,we agree here. The local Prioress (title in my Community) is the "steward of the Holy Rule and Constitutions.) It is her main responsibility that the Rule and Constitutions are adhered to even though each individual Sister is accountable to God in obeying what she has freely consented to by virtue of her vows.
It is true that God’s will for us is communicated through many ways; but we cannot leave behind the structure of religious life and the Church. That would be secularism.
***Yes, I fully agree. It is part of the whole mystery of religious obedience. We obey in faith that God’s will, for a consecrated Religious, is embodied in the essentials and structure of religious life and in the Church through the voice of the legitimate Superior.

I’m sorry, JR, for my way of responding in this manner of lines. I still have not learned how to multi-quotes!***
Click to expand...
You’re format is fine, Sister. It’s easy to follow. I can see that our two communities have many similarities. The only major difference that we have is in the area of obedience. But we are two different families. Among Franciscans from the Franciscan succession, assignments are not discussed with the religious. This is not allowed by the rule. You are told of your assingment usually two weeks before. You may ask for an assignment. That is allowed. But you are never asked what you think about an assignment that you’re being given. Friars and sisters are not pesons with thoughts, feelings, opinions, wants or desires. Those are surrendered to Lady Poverty. St. Francis wrote that we must always keep quiet and do as we are told, even when we know that the superior is wrong or that we have a better idea. “This type of obedience is pleasing to God and man,” he wrote. A superior may never order you to sin. But anything else is fair play. To ensure that this obedience takes place, Francis writes, “The brothers and the sisters are bound to obey Father Francis through his canonically elected successors until the end of time.” This places boundaries on the superiors too. He was very careful to leave many instructions for them. The difference is that in our tradition obedience is part of poverty.

In any case,whether we’re speaking of a Caremlite model or a Franciscan model, the fact remains the same. Many women religious have lost this sense of HOLY obedience. Obedience is often looked upon as soemthing ambiguous or something oppressive, but certainly not holy. That sense of the holy has to be recovered. To be honest, I’m not sure that some communities can do so at this point. I really believe that some of them have to be either disbanded, merged with another community that is spiritually stronger or allowed to die. You can’t always turn people around who have been doing something for almost half-century. What do others think?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Sister_Helena said:
Someone on this forum posed the question of why we have a shortage of priests. I would like to pose the same question with regards religious women, specifically Religious Sisters.
Why do we have a crisis right now with religious vocations?
And what do you think are the steps which can be taken to address the issues?
Click to expand...
It’s because of money and materalism. Girls rather dress with brand name clothes than a habit.
 
Sister_Helena said:
Someone on this forum posed the question of why we have a shortage of priests. I would like to pose the same question with regards religious women, specifically Religious Sisters.
Why do we have a crisis right now with religious vocations?
And what do you think are the steps which can be taken to address the issues?
Click to expand...
For some orders, when you make your bed with the Devil, all Hell breaks loose. 🤷
 
I agree with Jennifer G 100%. I have a strong vocation to become a nun/sister, but every community I see on the internet does not wear the habit. The habit is a huge issua for me. I feel that wearing the habit is a symbol of giving up vanity completely. It’s also an outward symbol to people, especially to girls. When i’m at mass and see a nun wearing a habit it reminds me of my vocation. I think the church allowing communities to do away with the traditional habit was terrible. To me it’s a bit of feminism getting into the church.
I want to be in an active order (maybe nursing or something like that) that wears the full, traditional habit, but at this point that is impossible to find.
 
child_of_God85 said:
I agree with Jennifer G 100%. I have a strong vocation to become a nun/sister, but every community I see on the internet does not wear the habit. The habit is a huge issua for me. I feel that wearing the habit is a symbol of giving up vanity completely. It’s also an outward symbol to people, especially to girls. When i’m at mass and see a nun wearing a habit it reminds me of my vocation. I think the church allowing communities to do away with the traditional habit was terrible. To me it’s a bit of feminism getting into the church.
I want to be in an active order (maybe nursing or something like that) that wears the full, traditional habit, but at this point that is impossible to find.
Click to expand...
Have you looked at the Carmelites of the Aged and Infirm? They wear a habit and do nursing. So do the Little Sisters of the Poor, Missionaries of Charity, Dominican Sisters of Mary, Dominican Sisters of St. Cecilia, Franciscan Sisters of the Martyr St. George, Franciscan Sisters of the Renewal, Sisters of Life, Franciscan Sisters of the Eucharist, etc.

Check out the website for the Conference of Major Superiors of Women Religious. Every gorup of sisters in the Conference wears a habit.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
I find it interesting that those religious orders who have allowed the albatross of zeitgeist around their necks have very few, if any vocations. Their orders are dying. I find it quite interesting that the more traditional orders have the abundance of vocations. Why is this?
Well, what do the less traditional orders have to offer a novice except more of the same as to what they find out in the world?
 
peary said:
I find it interesting that those religious orders who have allowed the albatross of zeitgeist around their necks have very few, if any vocations. Their orders are dying. I find it quite interesting that the more traditional orders have the abundance of vocations. Why is this?
Well, what do the less traditional orders have to offer a novice except more of the same as to what they find out in the world?
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, many religious congregations became so involved in the doing, as I say, that they lost toiuch with the being. Religious life is not so much about what you do, but about who you are. Whether we are male or female, the essence is the same. We are men and women whose lives must give witness to what awaits us in heaven. When we become very involved in ministry, we must make certain that we do not lose sight of the missioin and purpose of religious life. Otherwise, we become what we do: nurses, teachers, social workers, etc.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
JReducation said:
Unfortunately, many religious congregations became so involved in the doing, as I say, that they lost toiuch with the being. Religious life is not so much about what you do, but about who you are. Whether we are male or female, the essence is the same. We are men and women whose lives must give witness to what awaits us in heaven. When we become very involved in ministry, we must make certain that we do not lose sight of the missioin and purpose of religious life. Otherwise, we become what we do: nurses, teachers, social workers, etc.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
Click to expand...
👍
 
One interesting flip side to this question of shortage of new religious sisters is the issue of retention. Even after the initial stage of discernment (the stage where one looks for the community with habits, young people and all the good criteria most cited on this thread and finds them), communities do not retain most of those who enter. You would think that if the issues of religious habits, traditional practices, younger members, are complied with, the shortage will be solved. It is not the case. So what else could be the reason/s? I am playing devil’s advocate here because I realize the importance of what were already mentioned by many on this thread and agree with them as far as the marketing issue is concerned. But there are deeper issues and needs involved I think on the part of those who are joining religious communities, which for one reason or other, is not met during formation.
 
Sister_Helena said:
One interesting flip side to this question of shortage of new religious sisters is the issue of retention. Even after the initial stage of discernment (the stage where one looks for the community with habits, young people and all the good criteria most cited on this thread and finds them), communities do not retain most of those who enter. You would think that if the issues of religious habits, traditional practices, younger members, are complied with, the shortage will be solved. It is not the case. So what else could be the reason/s? I am playing devil’s advocate here because I realize the importance of what were already mentioned by many on this thread and agree with them as far as the marketing issue is concerned. But there are deeper issues and needs involved I think on the part of those who are joining religious communities, which for one reason or other, is not met during formation.
Click to expand...
Again, traditional orders (traditional habits, traditional practices, etc.) are gaining in novices and membership. The less traditional orders have very little or no novices and cannot keep the members they have - they either leave or die. Marketing has nothing to do with it. Less traditional orders have very little to offer an incoming novice except more of the same in the world. Less traditional orders also are, for the most part, at odds with the Teaching Magesterium of the Church which causes a noticeable rupture in the Body of Christ.

Young people, when seriously discerning a vocation, and once decided, want to commit. But if there is a discontinuity among the order and what the Church teaches, they think twice as to whether or not they want to remain associated with such an order.

I know, because I’ve been there. 🙂
 
\LOL now I’m not suggesting billboards, “The Few, The Proud, The Nuns”\

**Why not? I think it’s a cool idea, myself!

Years ago there was a letter to the National Catholic Reporter answering this question. The writer asked, “What’s the purpose of going through a novitiate and making vows, and then living like a secular? You might as well BE a secular.”

So many sisters recently (though hardly most) have become “social workers that don’t date,” in the words of another observer.**
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top