Which orders are most focused on ecumenism?

[Lief_Erikson]

I would like to join a religious order, and I’m looking through them at now, discerning this vocation. One of my strongest passions as a Catholic is ecumenism. Can you share with me which orders are most focused on ecumenism and outreach to other Christians? This can include evangelization of non-Christians as well.

I would also like to join an order with a strong Marian emphasis in their devotional life.

I’d appreciate suggestions . I’m going to go over these matters with my spiritual director too, but I’m searching for ideas.

 

[jimcav]

I might be wrong here, but almost all the great orders and congregations of the Church, such as the Dominicans, Jesuits, Franciscans etc., began before or soon after the reformation, so I’m thinking there was little need to actually evangelise or be ecumenical or to even put that language into there orders. These orders were more concerned with reverting people that had left the Church and bringing sinners back to the only Christian faith that existed in their time, Catholicism. Maybe this has changed over the centuries, I’m not sure, but I’m guessing you would need to look at the newer orders or congregations.

I do know that the Passionists have done much to try and evangelise in the 19th and 20th centuries. St. Dominic Barberi comes to mind, as he was sent to England in the 19th century to bring England back to our faith and he layed a solid groundwork for that to happen, because now finally, the Anglicans are looking to return en-masse!

I also listen to Fr. Groeschel on EWTN, the Franciscan Capuchin and he often talks in terms of ecumenical dialogue. So maybe the Capuchins are ecumenical?

 

[JReducation]

Actually the religious orders were all founded before the Reformation. The Congregations were founded after the Reformation. The last Order to be founded were the Jesuits, during the Reformation. During the Reformation there were also reforms of the orders taking place, such as the Capuchin Franciscan reform and the Discalced Carmelite reform. But these are not new orders. These folks were members of their respective orders and they simply founded separate houses Shortly after the Reformation the Chuch decreed that no knew religous orders could be founded. Every group that came aftetward was reduced to the status of a congregation. The reason was political. The orders were independent of the bishops and they still are. They only answer to the pope. The congregations could be either of Pontifical Right, dependent on the pope or Diocesan Right, dependent on the bishop.

As to the real question of this thread, there is a branch of the Franciscan Order called Franciscans of the Atonement, sometimes called the Graymore Franciscans, because their motherhouse is in Graymore, NY. They wee founded to work specifically on Ecumanism. You can contact them at this address.

atonementfriars.org/

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Lief_Erikson]

Thanks for the advice, guys. I’ll look into those orders.

Looking forward to still more thoughts! I’m seeking a broad range of alternatives so I can find the ones closest to my own passions.

 

[JesuXPIPassio]

Thanks for the advice, guys. I’ll look into those orders.

Looking forward to still more thoughts! I’m seeking a broad range of alternatives so I can find the ones closest to my own passions.

You might wanna learn about something called Taize. It’s not actually Catholic, but it has Catholic members as well as protestant ones.

If you want a bona fide Catholic religious order, I doubt you’ll find one easily. The more established orders wouldn’t be likely to have the set goal of ecumenism because, like the other posters noted, they come from before the Reformation. The Jesuits came after the Reformation, true, but their goal was to bring the protestants back, not to reach out to them. Religious orders often gain attention when its founder is declared a saint, and it’s too early for many founders from the last forty years (when people began to focus on ecumenism after Vatican II) to have been declared a saint yet.

Perhaps the Missionaries of Charity might also be something worth looking at. I don’t think they do much with relations with other denominations and religions per se, but they do minister to everyone no matter what religion. And unlike Taize, it might be easier to get in touch with a Missionaries of Charity organisation near you. It’s the same order founded by Mother Teresa, so it’s gained some popularity.

(P.S.: jimcav, I love your signature!)

 

[irisfromohio]

It has been my experience (and keep in mind, I am a FITTY SIX year old broad) that Benedictines have become quite the ecumenical order. Jesuits also, to some degree. But my oldest sister is a Benedictine Oblate & she is Presbyterian. While their tradition is very orthodox, they open their charism to anyone who is Christian. Just my thinking on the subject.

 

[JReducation]

Taize is not a bad idea and it does have the approval of the Catholic Church. It’s superior general after the death of Br. Roger was a Catholic. I’m not sure if he’s still the superior general, because I don’t know how often they have elections. They are very monastic.

Also, in Washington DC we have the headquarters for the Franciscan Commisereate of the Holy Land. This ia province of the Franciscan Order that was founded as a result of a treaty between St. Francis and the Muslims. They work in the Palestinian region serving all peoples. They run many centers for the families, health, schools, and other special needs programs. But they are not allowed to proselytize to the Jews or the Muslims. That was the deal between Francis and the Muslims. However, they have made many converst over the years by their presence and their kindness to the local people, especially every time a civil crisis breaks out, because the friars always try to bring the people to peaceful resolutions. They are very good at it. Unfortunately, the local governments do not follow the example of their citizens.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Young_Thinker]

I also listen to Fr. Groeschel on EWTN, the Franciscan Capuchin and he often talks in terms of ecumenical dialogue. So maybe the Capuchins are ecumenical?

From what I have read, he is not a "regular Capuchin but rather of the Franciscan of Renewal, a congregation which he founded.

 

[Young_Thinker]

I would like to join a religious order, and I’m looking through them at now, discerning this vocation. One of my strongest passions as a Catholic is ecumenism. Can you share with me which orders are most focused on ecumenism and outreach to other Christians? This can include evangelization of non-Christians as well.

I would also like to join an order with a strong Marian emphasis in their devotional life.

I’d appreciate suggestions . I’m going to go over these matters with my spiritual director too, but I’m searching for ideas.

The Servite friars, to whom I am rather allured, seem to be like that and are devoted to the Mother of Sorrows. At least historically, Capuchins and Jesuits have been excellent propagators of the faith. Also do not forget about the Paulists and St. Damien of Molokai’s congregation(I keep forgetting their name!).

 

[JReducation]

From what I have read, he is not a "regular Capuchin but rather of the Franciscan of Renewal, a congregation which he founded.

Fr. Benedict did now found the Franciscans of the Renewal. There were six Capuchin friars, one was Fr. Benedict. They asked the Minister General if they could begin a Renewal of the Capuchin Franciscan Order. The Minister General gave them a leave of absence to try it out. They had five years or return to their original community. Fr. Benedict was elected the first superior. That’s the confusion.

All of the Franciscan orders do some kind of cooperative ministry with other faiths. But the only two that do it as their full-time ministry are the Franciscans of the Atonement and the Franciscans of the Commiesereate of the Holy Land. The Atonement Friars work with Protestants. The Holy Land Friars work with Muslims and Jews. Neither order is allowed to try to convert the non Catholics. They are to preach the Gospel by word and deed, but not proselytize. For example, they can’t go door to door telling people that they’re gong to hell because they’re not Catholic. That’s a big no no for St. Francis.

The other group who does a lot with people of other faiths is Mother Teresa’s Missionaries of Charity. They also follow the same rule as St. Francis. Proselytizing is not allowed. They preach the Gospel through word and deed.

The Franciscans and Dominicans had a big battle over this proselytizing and brough charges against the first Jesuits who came to the Americas. The Jesuits came with their bible in hand determined to baptize the Indians, even if it was against their will to be baptized. The Franciscans and Dominicans stepped between them and the Indians and filed charges against them with the Pope and the King and Queen of Spain. From that time forward, proselytizing by Catholics has always been discouraged. Bring people into the faith by answering their questions, by letting them see your faith, by your charity toward them even if they are afraid of you or hate you, and most importantly by worshipping in their presence. Give public witness to your fiath wihtout using words, unless you’re on the internet where people can’t see you. Then you have to use words.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Young_Thinker]

Fr. Benedict did now found the Franciscans of the Renewal. There were six Capuchin friars, one was Fr. Benedict. They asked the Minister General if they could begin a Renewal of the Capuchin Franciscan Order. The Minister General gave them a leave of absence to try it out. They had five years or return to their original community. Fr. Benedict was elected the first superior. That’s the confusion.

All of the Franciscan orders do some kind of cooperative ministry with other faiths. But the only two that do it as their full-time ministry are the Franciscans of the Atonement and the Franciscans of the Commiesereate of the Holy Land. The Atonement Friars work with Protestants. The Holy Land Friars work with Muslims and Jews. Neither order is allowed to try to convert the non Catholics. They are to preach the Gospel by word and deed, but not proselytize. For example, they can’t go door to door telling people that they’re gong to hell because they’re not Catholic. That’s a big no no for St. Francis.

The other group who does a lot with people of other faiths is Mother Teresa’s Missionaries of Charity. They also follow the same rule as St. Francis. Proselytizing is not allowed. They preach the Gospel through word and deed.

The Franciscans and Dominicans had a big battle over this proselytizing and brough charges against the first Jesuits who came to the Americas. The Jesuits came with their bible in hand determined to baptize the Indians, even if it was against their will to be baptized. The Franciscans and Dominicans stepped between them and the Indians and filed charges against them with the Pope and the King and Queen of Spain. From that time forward, proselytizing by Catholics has always been discouraged. Bring people into the faith by answering their questions, by letting them see your faith, by your charity toward them even if they are afraid of you or hate you, and most importantly by worshipping in their presence. Give public witness to your fiath wihtout using words, unless you’re on the internet where people can’t see you. Then you have to use words.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

I appreciate your explanation, Brother. It think that it is silly, though, that proselytism, per se, is no longer allowed(Vatican II?).

 

[JReducation]

I appreciate your explanation, Brother. It think that it is silly, though, that proselytism, per se, is no longer allowed(Vatican II?).

Not Vatican II. The Lateran Council. The two biggest opponents to it were Francis of Assisi and Dominic Guzman. They pleaded with the Cardinals until it was agreed that preachers woudl preach, but not proselytize. They would still go out and deliver sermons, retreat talks, answer questions, live out the faith in the presence of all so as to bring the message of Christ. But they would not threaten, coerce or frighten people into acceptig the faith.

Over the years this was forgotten, mostly due to the Protestant Reformation, when all those heated debates between theologians took place. The Jesuits started to proselytize again using scare tactics to conver the Indians in the Americas. The Franciscans and Dominicans, faithful to their founders, filed a formal complaint against the Jesuits, one in civil court and the other in ecclesiastical court. The Jesuits lost in both courts. The Franciscans and Dominicans argued that faith that accepted our of fear rather than love is not faith. They also argued that the mission of the Dominicans and Franciscans was to preach the faith with charity and that the Jesuits were sabbotaging it, because they were forcing the natives to be baptized. The third complaint filed by the Franciscans was that they had been founded to convert Catholics, but the Jesuits were allowing Catholics to live laxed lives, while they bullied the Indians to comply with Catholicism and were engaging the help of the civil athorities, which was lay and Catholic. It was a big mess and took years to fix.

To this day the Franciscan, Junipero Serra and the Dominican Bartolome de las Casas are revered by the Hispanic Americans, because they protected their religious freedom way back in the 1500s. Yet, despite not proselytizing, the Franciscans did manage to convert the Catholics to Catholicism and the Dominicans managed to convert the Indians, because they were dearly loved. Later, Isaac Jogues, SJ would come as a different kind of missionary and made converts. Francis Xavier did too in the East. Once the Jesuits toned it down, they made great progress in converting people. It was not just people paying lip service to Catholicism.

The three orders: Jesuits, Dominicans and Franciscans have very good relations with people of other faiths for their kindness, compassion and their faith.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Young_Thinker]

Not Vatican II. The Lateran Council. The two biggest opponents to it were Francis of Assisi and Dominic Guzman. They pleaded with the Cardinals until it was agreed that preachers woudl preach, but not proselytize. They would still go out and deliver sermons, retreat talks, answer questions, live out the faith in the presence of all so as to bring the message of Christ. But they would not threaten, coerce or frighten people into acceptig the faith.

Over the years this was forgotten, mostly due to the Protestant Reformation, when all those heated debates between theologians took place. The Jesuits started to proselytize again using scare tactics to conver the Indians in the Americas. The Franciscans and Dominicans, faithful to their founders, filed a formal complaint against the Jesuits, one in civil court and the other in ecclesiastical court. The Jesuits lost in both courts. The Franciscans and Dominicans argued that faith that accepted our of fear rather than love is not faith. They also argued that the mission of the Dominicans and Franciscans was to preach the faith with charity and that the Jesuits were sabbotaging it, because they were forcing the natives to be baptized. The third complaint filed by the Franciscans was that they had been founded to convert Catholics, but the Jesuits were allowing Catholics to live laxed lives, while they bullied the Indians to comply with Catholicism and were engaging the help of the civil athorities, which was lay and Catholic. It was a big mess and took years to fix.

To this day the Franciscan, Junipero Serra and the Dominican Bartolome de las Casas are revered by the Hispanic Americans, because they protected their religious freedom way back in the 1500s. Yet, despite not proselytizing, the Franciscans did manage to convert the Catholics to Catholicism and the Dominicans managed to convert the Indians, because they were dearly loved. Later, Isaac Jogues, SJ would come as a different kind of missionary and made converts. Francis Xavier did too in the East. Once the Jesuits toned it down, they made great progress in converting people. It was not just people paying lip service to Catholicism.

The three orders: Jesuits, Dominicans and Franciscans have very good relations with people of other faiths for their kindness, compassion and their faith.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

I see.

 

[Lief_Erikson]

Brother JR, I’m not altogether clear on what the “no prostyletizing” means. You point out the use of scare-tactics and coercion, but what about simply holding peaceful discussions about our differences with people of other faiths? These could, if we are unlucky, become debates, but if the Lord blesses us, they could become fruitful means of bringing people closer to God and possibly into the Catholic Church. I’m reminded of St. Peter when he preached to 3,000 non-Catholics in one day and converted them all. Is that permissible in religious orders, or would it be considered “prostyletizing”?

 

[JReducation]

Brother JR, I’m not altogether clear on what the “no prostyletizing” means. You point out the use of scare-tactics and coercion, but what about simply holding peaceful discussions about our differences with people of other faiths? These could, if we are unlucky, become debates, but if the Lord blesses us, they could become fruitful means of bringing people closer to God and possibly into the Catholic Church. I’m reminded of St. Peter when he preached to 3,000 non-Catholics in one day and converted them all. Is that permissible in religious orders, or would it be considered “prostyletizing”?

What you’re describing is not proselytizing. That’s evangelizing. Proselytizing is using force. Force usually takes the form of threats such as telling people that they are not going to be saved if they do not become Catholic. Thay’s psychologicial force. The Church knows that non Catholics can go to heaven. Another form of proselytizing is to use the state, such as laws that do not grant equal rights to non Catholics. This was common in the past. I can’t think of any country that still has such laws. Proselytizing can take the form of criticism of a person’s faith. If I criticize the Lutherans in order to persuade a Lutheran to become a Catholic. That’s a violation of charity. The Church does not allow this. Or if you provide services to the poor, but they must be Catholic. That’s proselytzing.

Proselytizing is any form of disrespect that we would not tolerate if a person of another faith did to us. We certainly don’t mind a person of another faith sharing their beliefs with us. But we also expect to be respected when we say, “No thank you. I’m Catholic and terminate the conversation.” We must give others the same right. This is the principle of religious freedom that some people think that Vatican II created. But in reality it was in effect since the 1200s and practiced by Francis of Assisi and Dominic. There have been times when it has been violated by all sides, not just Catholics. That’s why the Church felt it was necessary to put it into writing, to impress upon Catholics that we do not tolerate proselytizing and injustice from others or from our own.

Does this help?

Fraternally in the Risen Lord,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Lief_Erikson]

Yes, thanks for clarifying the distinctions between prostelytizing and evangelism. That post helped a lot .