Thanks for explaining Brother! I did find the Capuchin Franciscan parish much the same, in that, by osmosis and fraternity, amongst themselves and with us, the sense of brotherhood and sharing of spirituality was also very much part our our lives. When the Order chose to call priest and brother by the designation “Brother” they explained, and we understood, realizing how important it was to them, but it was still helpful to know who was ordained, who wasn’t, for the purposes of the Sacraments. I wonder how deeply the Australian ‘mateship’, a prized Australian characteristic inherited with our sense of ourselves, does actually influence us more than we Australians realize, even in our spiritual lives? I wonder how much a national psyche affects its spirituality?
.
Your first paragraph points to two things that all of us would benefit from.
First:
You mentioned how the Franciscans changed back to Brother, from Father and Brother. We have been trying to comply with that order in the USA since the 1990s, when it was first given to us by the Holy Father. We, Franciscans, even got a blast from Pope Benedict for still calling our ordained men, “Father.” The only way that we have been able to get around it in the USA is through the younger friars. When they are ordained, we do not change their title. To try to change the title of the older friars from Father to Brother has been a problem. They have gotten used to being called Father, because they have been serving in positions that were typically positions of diocesan priests. The people called the diocesans Father, when the Franciscans arrived, they called them Father. It’s almost cruel now to insist that these friars go back to Brother.
What we want people to understand is that if you belong to a parish run by Franciscans, attend a school run by Franciscans, or are in any situation where Franciscans are present, you need to know that Franciscans do not use the titles “Father” and “Brother” to tell apart those who are ordained and those who are not. Franciscans have always been “Brother.” It was the mind of Francis that the men who followed him formed a brotherhood. They were theologians, priests, carpenters, farmers, lawyers, princess, etc, but when they put on that habit, they were brothers to each other and to the Church. It was Francis’ theology that every Franciscan stood in Christ’s place as the first-born of many brothers. That’s why the term brother is so important to Franciscans. If you take it away, you take away our reason for existing, to be Christ among many brothers and sisters.
Another important point that you make is that the culture does affect the pyche. Americans do not have the warm, fraternal relationships between clergy, religious and laity. We have become a more cautious society. I don’t want to say distant, because that does not quite describe it. I think that we have become “gun-shy” in this country. We tend to keep our distance to avoid being hurt. Everyone gets hurt. But I believe that Americans are very hyper-vigilant. It’s sad, because we are a good people. When you get to know Americans, you find normal loving and generous people. But our distance has something to do with hyper-vigilance.
When we first came to this diocese our superior changed all of our titles. We all became Brother. We were told, don’t tell unless it’s necessary, such as a person who asks if you can hear their confession. At first, some people thought that we were hiding something from them. They would ask us, are your a priest or a brother and we would respond, “We’re all brothers. Do you need an ordained brother?” Some of the older people though that we were doing double talk. The younger generation go it. Now they walk in and ask for a priest when they want one. But the older group was always hyper-vigilant, as if we were pulling a fast one on them. I believe it’s our psyche.
The same thing happens with vocations. In the USA we seem to have mindset that vocations to the religious life (men) without vocation to the priesthood is lacking something. There is that American pragmatici culture showing itself again. You have to be able to DO SOMETHING, not just be someone. In many societies, religious men are appreciated and loved for who why are, Consecrated Men.
The Holy Father, John Paul II wrote a wonderful statement on religious life that we have failed to make public in the USA. I don’t know if they have read it in other countries. Right now my own community is teaching it in religious education to our middle and high school students. But most people never heard of it. So they missed the Church’s deep appreciation for religious life of men.
**By their vows, religious assume the observance of the three evangelical counsels; they are consecrated to God through the ministry of the Church (can. 607, 654), **
The idea of being consecrated to God is not very clear in the minds of many people. People are often confused between being consecrated and doing. They are not the same. Doing is external. It is important, but does not make one a religious. There is the big difference between being a diocesan priest and a religious man.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
opcorn: