Why don't people listen to those who live the life?

[elts1956]

You know, during the several years that I have been on CAF, I have known several priests, brothers, sisters and one nun who tried to post on these vocation threads. We all know each other. I know two who know another three and those know about three more. It’s like a little network. The one thing that we often share via PMs, when we can speak to each other by first names, is the fact that people post on the vocation forums, but they don’t seem to pay attention to what we’re saying. This is very frustrating, to the point that several of these men and women who really want to promote vocations to their diocese, their orders or the priesthood and religious life in general, often feel that they cannot do so on this forum.

The secular lay people who come onto this forum don’t give the people who are living the life a hearing. We try to point out what religious life is and how it is lived; no one wants to discuss that.

To discuss vocations one must understand certain things. We often try to point them out and explain them, but people don’t want to discuss them. I’ll give a few examples of topics that get swept under the carpet around here.

One major one that a man thinking about priesthood should know about is the difference between the priesthood and the consecrated life. They are not the same and will never be the same. People just ignore us and move on to their idea of what priesthood is.

The fact that males have options: diaconate, priesthood, and brotherhood. Everyone wants to talk about priesthood. Two of the three options are dismissed.

You cannot appreciate celibacy unless you appreciate the sacredness of marriage. People seem to want to either push celibacy without explaining it in the light of marriage or they want to do away with it. They don’t discuss the relationship between the two.

Then there are the different forms of religious life: religious orders, secular orders, secular institutes, societies of apostolic life, religious congregations all offering beautiful ways to holiness. We mention these, people sail right past them back to priesthood, without placing priests in proper context.

I don’t know how many times we have explained that a diocesan priest is a secular man, not a consecrated man. People come back and start attributing to him qualities that are not appropriate for secular man, but belong to the consecrated man, despite the fact that those of us who live the life are saying, “We’re not the same and we don’t want to be the same.” It’s as if posters want to dictate what God decides regarding vocations.

There are so many options for women. A woman can be a sister, a nun, a secular religious, a consecrated virgin or a wife and mother. These never get a hearing. At least one of these options can be combined with marriage and motherhood.

The distinct charisms in the Church get ignored, even when they are presented: hermit, monastic, mendicant, clerk regular for men. Hermit, monastic and sisterhood and consecrated virgin for women. They get ignored too.

There are many reasons for the decline in parish priests that have nothing to do with celibacy. A lot has to do with Vatican II’s demand that those priests who belong to religious orders go back to being religious and drop out of parishes and that those religious orders that were not founded as orders for priests cut back on the surplus of priests or the fact that Vatican II demanded that religious orders of priests, brothers and sisters that were founded to do other work that is not parish, leave the parishes. The impression that one gets is that the only concern here is the parish, because that’s where I am. The other needs of the Church or the gifts that these communities bring to the Church are not important to me. Then there is the fact that people seem not to want to understand what a secular priest is supposed to do and is not expected to do by the Church herself.

Posters are never going to get straight answers about the different vocations if this community is not open to learning about them from those who are there. Even marriage is not well discussed here.

Why can’t these threads welcome and allow the deacons, priests, and religious to share what the call is about and ask questions for understanding, instead of arguing what it should be according to the point of view of the poster? The few of us who come to this forum want to help those who are discerning. Can the secular lay poster let us do that, without the arguing or the redirecting? The information is pretty straightforward, if people want to hear it.

Marriage, Holy Orders and consecrated life are beautiful and everyone can benefit, if we learn to listen, ask the right questions and avoid trying to dictate what these ways of life should be.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Hello Br. JR. Just came across your post. So I will throw out a tid bit to perhaps talk about. You mention the difference between priests and those whose vocation is of the “Consecrated” life. I thought all priests had been consecrated or vowed to live a consecrated life?? I understand that being a brother, deacon, lay religious etc. is also that of belonging to the consecrated life. So what is the difference? If you have exhausted this subject on another thread, lead me to it, so you don’t have to repeat, repeat, repeat. Blessings. Elts1956

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Hello Br. JR. Just came across your post. So I will throw out a tid bit to perhaps talk about. You mention the difference between priests and those whose vocation is of the “Consecrated” life. I thought all priests had been consecrated or vowed to live a consecrated life?? I understand that being a brother, deacon, lay religious etc. is also that of belonging to the consecrated life. So what is the difference? If you have exhausted this subject on another thread, lead me to it, so you don’t have to repeat, repeat, repeat. Blessings. Elts1956

Consecrated life is the taking of the religious vows of Poverty, Chastity, and Obedience. All religious take these vows. Religious brothers, sisters, nuns, monks, friars, all of them. Some of these male religious might also be ordained, what is known as a regular priest. Priesthood and religious life are two vocations that can go together but do not always do so.

A priest in a diocese is what is known as a secular priest, they take no vows, they are not consecrated. They take promises of celibacy and obedience to their bishop. The same goes for a permanent deacon in a diocese.

 

[joandarc2008]

You know it is funny this conversation came up last night because we have one of those Middle class parishes run by Franciscan Brothers - only two - one priest and one deacon. I was at a leadership meeting for my young adult group and the leader was going on about how they changed mass on Holy Days from 7pm to 6pm because it was a long day for the Brothers and she felt it did not serve the needs for the community.

So I explained to her that they are Brothers first and that their day starts incredibly early the next day and it is not fair to them who give the community three masses, LOH, Adoration to not give them this one hour. She immediately said but some of them priests. I said yes but those that are priests are Brothers first and the needs of the Religious Order must come first. I got looked at like I had two heads. It is sad that we as laity have become so selfish. On a Holy Day of Obligation we are worried more about what our Brothers who are priests are doing for us than what we can do with our schedule to get to Mass.

 

[elts1956]

Consecrated life is the taking of the religious vows of Poverty, Chastity, and Obedience. All religious take these vows. Religious brothers, sisters, nuns, monks, friars, all of them. Some of these male religious might also be ordained, what is known as a regular priest. Priesthood and religious life are two vocations that can go together but do not always do so.

A priest in a diocese is what is known as a secular priest, they take no vows, they are not consecrated. They take promises of celibacy and obedience to their bishop. The same goes for a permanent deacon in a diocese.

Also, as I understand it, the secular priest receives a salary/stipend through the parish, but this may as well be a resignation to poverty.

 

[Shoshana]

Also, as I understand it, the secular priest receives a salary/stipend through the parish, but this may as well be a resignation to poverty.

As I understand it, their salary is below poverty level! Not bad for being on call 24-7! (Well a lot of priests anyway).

 

[elts1956]

As I understand it, their salary is below poverty level! Not bad for being on call 24-7! (Well a lot of priests anyway).

If the ladies of our parish didn’t take food to Father, I wonder if he could survive?

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Also, as I understand it, the secular priest receives a salary/stipend through the parish, but this may as well be a resignation to poverty.

As I understand it, their salary is below poverty level! Not bad for being on call 24-7! (Well a lot of priests anyway).

If the ladies of our parish didn’t take food to Father, I wonder if he could survive?

Many dioceses also pay a parish priest a stipend for food and other such things which is non-taxable. They are also allowed to inherent.

Those who take the vow of poverty can not inherent.

 

[joandarc2008]

I don’t know at the last parish I was at the Secular clergy member had somehow managed to buy one home for retirement that he did not live in - build an on property rectory that was cleaned by parish employees, drive a porsche, own a boat (which was borrowed for Church functions), and make yearly trips to Ireland. His family was quite well off and he was the last surviving child. That being said I cannot think of a single visiting priest that filled in his vacation time that did not make a joke about borrowing the Porsche.

While there are no vows of poverty - and please correct me if I am wrong - are there norms? Are there standards? Just some thoughts.

 

[JReducation]

You know it is funny this conversation came up last night because we have one of those Middle class parishes run by Franciscan Brothers - only two - one priest and one deacon. I was at a leadership meeting for my young adult group and the leader was going on about how they changed mass on Holy Days from 7pm to 6pm because it was a long day for the Brothers and she felt it did not serve the needs for the community.

So I explained to her that they are Brothers first and that their day starts incredibly early the next day and it is not fair to them who give the community three masses, LOH, Adoration to not give them this one hour. She immediately said but some of them priests. I said yes but those that are priests are Brothers first and the needs of the Religious Order must come first. I got looked at like I had two heads. It is sad that we as laity have become so selfish. On a Holy Day of Obligation we are worried more about what our Brothers who are priests are doing for us than what we can do with our schedule to get to Mass.

If the friars’ daily schedule is anything like mine, and I suspect that it would be similar, since we follow the same rule of life, even though we are different branches of the same family, a 7:00 pm mass is a terrible intrusion on religious life. It should be avoided, if possible. There are times when it’s not possible and you work around it.

Many years ago, I lived in a house attached to a parish. They had a daily 7:00 pm mass. We had Vespers at 4:30, community recreation at 5:15 and supper at 6:30. The friar assigned to celebrate the 7:00 mass had to get up from the table at 6:50. This was in imposition on the community. He could never finish a meal with his brothers, if it was his week to celebrate that mass. His brothers could not enjoy his company that week. Fortunately, this was a house with 12 friars. In a house with two friars, as is Joan’s case, this is destructive of community life.

The other option is to have a split evening. You have to celebrate Vespers before the evening mass. Then you would have the evening meal then the evening mass. Then you come back for community recreation, study, silence and night prayer.

If posters will recall, there is a difference between a religious order and a religious congregation. A religious order has a way of life that is static. It cannot change, hence the term “order”. A congregation is a group of men or women, who consecrate their lives around a particular ministry: teaching, parish, preaching, missions, etc. They organize their schedules around the ministry. Orders, religious and secular orders alike do the opposite. We organize our ministries around the way of life.

For example, Dominicans, who are called to be preachers who live in a brotherhood (friars), arrange their preaching and teaching around their monastic observances. They still go out and preach. But preaching cannot take priority over monastic or conventual life. Franciscans are also an order. We have no defined ministry. Each friar or brother brings his gifts and the ministries are varied. However, the way of life is not so diversified. There are core values that are part of our consecration. To us the most important of these are: prayer, obedience, brotherhood and poverty. Everything that we do is regulated by these core values.

This should be no different from the life of married people. Everything that a married person does should be regulated by his duties as a spouse. We have seen what happens to marriages when the marriage takes a back seat to the work of the spouses. It should be no surprise what happens to religious life when the consecrated life takes a back seat to the consecration.

This is where diocesan (secular) deacons, priests and bishops have a lot more freedom. Usually, they are neither married nor consecrated. They are celibate and secular. They can organize their life of work any way they want to do it, because each of them is an individual, not a member of a community like the religious are or half of a marriage as husbands and wives are, unless the deacon or priest is married. In that case, he has to balance between ministry and marriage, just as religious balance between ministry and community. There is more to community life than living together.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[JReducation]

Also, as I understand it, the secular priest receives a salary/stipend through the parish, but this may as well be a resignation to poverty.

There is no resgination of poverty, because a secular priest does not make a vow of poverty. He can be a millionaire. If my father were Donald Trump, I can still become a priest and inherit the Trump empire. I could not do that as a member of a religious order in vows. But I can do it as diocesan priest.

As I understand it, their salary is below poverty level! Not bad for being on call 24-7! (Well a lot of priests anyway).

This is not accurate. Beween their salary and their living expenses, it all ads up to a full salary equal to that of a middle income person. There are some parishes that cannot afford to pay their priests a full salary. These men are the exception, not the rule.

If the ladies of our parish didn’t take food to Father, I wonder if he could survive?

Many dioceses also pay a parish priest a stipend for food and other such things which is non-taxable. They are also allowed to inherent.

Those who take the vow of poverty can not inherent.

Church law is very clear on this. The diocesan priest MUST be paid a salary, not just a stipend. The obligation to pay him falls on those whom he serves. It may be the hospital, the parish or the school. But someone has to pay him. This is justice.

In most dioceses the parish also provides living expenses to offset the salary requirements. It’s cheaper for the parish to provide a house that is paid for than to pay someone $60,000.00 per year. You can cut that back to $30K a year and provide a rectory, with no mortgage. You’re saving the parish a lot of money, especially if you have more than one priest in the parish.

If the parish belongs to a diocese and it is staffed by religious, such as Carmelites, et al, the parish has a legal obligation to pay the religious order for the services of the number of men in the contract…

Let’s say that the parish has a contract with the Franciscans for two men. The Franciscans bring in six. The parish must pay the salaries for the two. These salaries are not paid to the men. They are paid to the community. The community has to figure out how to support six men on two salaries. But the parish has to pay. That is justice.

The vow of poverty does not mean that a religious community works for free when the beneficiary can pay. St. Francis said it best. “The brothers should always work and live from the fruit of their work. If they do not receive enough recompense for their work, they should beg.” He never said that they should work for free. Begging was to happen only if the wages were not enough. Francis did not rule out wages.

That’s how we support many of our ministries among the poorest of the poor. Some friars bring in enough money to pay for the expenses of those friars who bring in no money. If you have a friar who teaches at the university or at the local seminary, he brings home a salary to support the five who work at the shelter. The three friars who serve at a middle-class parish will send their salary to the motherhouse where it is distributed.

Another financial obligation that religious have, that diocesan priests do not have, is the care of the elderly. A diocese does not have to provide for its retired priests. The diocese provides retriement insurance. The priest retires and gets his pension and his social security. Remember, diocesan priests pay taxes and FICA. Their income is NOT TAX FREE. Dioceses do not pay FICA for their clergy, only for their lay employees. A Diocesan priest has to find a place to live and care for himself. A religious (priest, brother or sister) has no place to live and no retirement insurance. The religious community must have its own retirement funds to cover its seniors and it must provide a place for them to live. Some religious communities use nursing homes. Franciscans do not. It is forbidden by the constitutions, unless the friar has a medical need that cannot be provided for in a friary. Otherwise, our friars return to the motherhouse where they are cared for by the younger friars until they die or they live in a smaller community house where the younger friars care for them. This means that the younger friars must make time from their ministry to care for their older brothers and find the money to do so. Many sisters do this too.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Shoshana]

Thanks Brother for your answer and again you are right. I think though it is the diocese that pays the priests’ salaries according to the size of the parish and expereince. Yes, they have a roof over their head and food on the table. I do not know how much is allotted to them for food. I know my director gets taken out for lunch or dinner enough times (me included). Their car, etc is their own responsibility.

I have know priests that were very frugal and when they retired, bought themselves a little house/cottage. And then there are those who live in a retirement home. They do receive pension from the government, old age and CPP. I do not know about the diocese paying pension though.

I have seen priests with luxurious cars and others with not os luxurious at all. I guess it would depend on the priest’s sense of of budgetting their won salaries…

 

[JReducation]

Thanks Brother for your answer and again you are right. I think though it is the diocese that pays the priests’ salaries according to the size of the parish and expereince. Yes, they have a roof over their head and food on the table. I do not know how much is allotted to them for food. I know my director gets taken out for lunch or dinner enough times (me included). Their car, etc is their own responsibility.

I have know priests that were very frugal and when they retired, bought themselves a little house/cottage. And then there are those who live in a retirement home. They do receive pension from the government, old age and CPP. I do not know about the diocese paying pension though.

I have seen priests with luxurious cars and others with not os luxurious at all. I guess it would depend on the priest’s sense of of budgetting their won salaries…

I forgot that you live in Canada. You probably have different legal rules there. In the USA, the parishes pay the salary, not the diocese. The priest is not employed by the diocese. He is employed by the parish, but the diocese owns the parish. The parish is like a subsidiary of the larger corporation.

In the USA diocesan priests pay taxes. This includes a retirement tax called FICA (Social Security). The diocese has a retirement plan, just like the teacher’s union does. When you retire, you have the retirement plan and you have the Federal Social Security. Along the way, you may also pick up money. You can charge for all of the extras that you do and you keep that money. When your parents die, you may get an inheritence and you get to keep that too. Any gift money that you get it yours to keep. You can even have two paying jobs such as parish work and teaching. Since you’re not a consecrated religious, you do not have a vow of poverty. This is your money. You can buy a nice home, nice car or whatever you want with it. The Church is only concerned with how you earn it. It must be earned honestly. The Church does not intervene in what you do with it.

A priest who is also a religious, does not have any of the above. He depends totally on his community to provide for him. As I said in a previous post, we often place several men at an assignment and get paid for two. The reason for placing more than two is to provide a community. Community life is important and essential to the religious life. You assign three or four men to one ministry and get paid for one. In essence the other three men are working for free. The vow of poverty calls for this. You work for free, if you have to do so, in order to preserve community life.

Sometimes, especially in very poor parishes. a religious community may place two or three men where they can only afford one salary. Because the parish is so poor, the religious feel that this is where they need to be, among the poor. They accept living in a parish that cannot afford them. They take one salary and put in three men or two men. They share that income and serve the local people. What people don’t know about religious is that when you have religious in your parish, they don’t get to keep the entire salary that the parish pays.

Let’s give this example. The parish pays two salaries. The Carmelites may come with four friars. It can be any order. I’ll use the Carmelites. They bring in four friars. They get paid for two. But this does not mean that four are living off the salary of two.

What happens is that the salary that comes in has to be divided. There is a certain amount that has to be sent to the motherhouse of the province for the care of the elderly and for the education of those in formation. What was originally the salary for two is now the salary for 1.5. However, you still have four friars. Now you have four living off the salary of 1.5. This is the difference between a religious community and a couple of diocesan priests. This would not happen with diocesan priests.

If the parish cannot afford four diocesan priests, it only gets as many as it can afford. Whether the money comes from the parish or through the diocese, it’s based on affordability. That is not the case with religious.

For example, we have one parish where there are six brothers. One is ordained. The other five are not and never will be ordained. The parish pays three salaries. The six of them live off of 2.25 salaries. The difference goes to care for the sick, old and formation of the young.

If the parish is staffed by diocesan priests, the care of the old priests and the formation of seminarians is a financial problem between the bishop and the laity. It does not involve the priests and deacons who serve the parish. They get to keep their full salary. That’s why they have to pay taxes for it too and that’s why they can rightfully own nice cars and homes. They worked for it.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Church law is very clear on this. The diocesan priest MUST be paid a salary, not just a stipend. The obligation to pay him falls on those whom he serves. It may be the hospital, the parish or the school. But someone has to pay him. This is justice.

I was not saying that priests’ do not get paid a salary.

I was saying that in addition to their salary some dioceses give their priests who work in parishes a stipend for food and other such things. A stipend is tax free.

My father, when he worked in Information Technology, had a job that required a lot of travel. In addition to his salary he was also given a stipend for car maintenance, gas, food, and lodging, this stipend was also tax free. It has nothing to do with the priest being a religious for the stipend to be tax free, it is just that all stipends fo this natrure are usually tax free.

 

[joandarc2008]

If the friars’ daily schedule is anything like mine, and I suspect that it would be similar, since we follow the same rule of life, even though we are different branches of the same family, a 7:00 pm mass is a terrible intrusion on religious life. It should be avoided, if possible. There are times when it’s not possible and you work around it.

Many years ago, I lived in a house attached to a parish. They had a daily 7:00 pm mass. We had Vespers at 4:30, community recreation at 5:15 and supper at 6:30. The friar assigned to celebrate the 7:00 mass had to get up from the table at 6:50. This was in imposition on the community. He could never finish a meal with his brothers, if it was his week to celebrate that mass. His brothers could not enjoy his company that week. Fortunately, this was a house with 12 friars. In a house with two friars, as is Joan’s case, this is destructive of community life.

The other option is to have a split evening. You have to celebrate Vespers before the evening mass. Then you would have the evening meal then the evening mass. Then you come back for community recreation, study, silence and night prayer.

If posters will recall, there is a difference between a religious order and a religious congregation. A religious order has a way of life that is static. It cannot change, hence the term “order”. A congregation is a group of men or women, who consecrate their lives around a particular ministry: teaching, parish, preaching, missions, etc. They organize their schedules around the ministry. Orders, religious and secular orders alike do the opposite. We organize our ministries around the way of life.

For example, Dominicans, who are called to be preachers who live in a brotherhood (friars), arrange their preaching and teaching around their monastic observances. They still go out and preach. But preaching cannot take priority over monastic or conventual life. Franciscans are also an order. We have no defined ministry. Each friar or brother brings his gifts and the ministries are varied. However, the way of life is not so diversified. There are core values that are part of our consecration. To us the most important of these are: prayer, obedience, brotherhood and poverty. Everything that we do is regulated by these core values.

This should be no different from the life of married people. Everything that a married person does should be regulated by his duties as a spouse. We have seen what happens to marriages when the marriage takes a back seat to the work of the spouses. It should be no surprise what happens to religious life when the consecrated life takes a back seat to the consecration.

This is where diocesan (secular) deacons, priests and bishops have a lot more freedom. Usually, they are neither married nor consecrated. They are celibate and secular. They can organize their life of work any way they want to do it, because each of them is an individual, not a member of a community like the religious are or half of a marriage as husbands and wives are, unless the deacon or priest is married. In that case, he has to balance between ministry and marriage, just as religious balance between ministry and community. There is more to community life than living together.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

I am glad they moved it to 6pm - I see the Brothers on Sunday looking very tired with this schedule as it is - I cannot imagine them trying to do this at 7pm. I think we need to appreciate our Religious Clergy AND our Secular Clergy as people not just servants of God.

 

[Poor_Clare_tobe]

*Peace and all good on this solemnity of Christ the King.

I rarely get on the forums anymore do to limited time during my formation. I just wanted to encourage Brother J.R and other religious who have time to continue to post here on the vocation forums.
(I have not had opportunity to log on to all the replies, that being said I would add one thing that hopefully is not out of order)

When i was posting more frequently I did find it daunting sometimes to respond as there were times when discussions would become heated. I would hope that there would be allowances made for information for various orders…(here) there is such a variety of callings in the Church… who knows but that a post might help someone even if it might not be “your cup of tea”… At any rate when I do log on these days I always try to come back to these forums…

Please continue to pray and encourage vocations… I know of so many young and not so young who are trying to respond to religious vocations ( And blessings on all those who are called to the married state… I pray for you all daily… just know here I am trying to help those perhaps called to religious life) Please pray for all of us that we might remain true to our calling (if we indeed are called)

Blessings to you all! And Br J.R. please keep posting!

Peace and all good!

Sr. Debbie, OSC*

 

[JReducation]

*Peace and all good on this solemnity of Christ the King.

I rarely get on the forums anymore do to limited time during my formation. I just wanted to encourage Brother J.R and other religious who have time to continue to post here on the vocation forums.
(I have not had opportunity to log on to all the replies, that being said I would add one thing that hopefully is not out of order)

When i was posting more frequently I did find it daunting sometimes to respond as there were times when discussions would become heated. I would hope that there would be allowances made for information for various orders…(here) there is such a variety of callings in the Church… who knows but that a post might help someone even if it might not be “your cup of tea”… At any rate when I do log on these days I always try to come back to these forums…

Please continue to pray and encourage vocations… I know of so many young and not so young who are trying to respond to religious vocations ( And blessings on all those who are called to the married state… I pray for you all daily… just know here I am trying to help those perhaps called to religious life) Please pray for all of us that we might remain true to our calling (if we indeed are called)

Blessings to you all! And Br J.R. please keep posting!

Peace and all good!

Sr. Debbie, OSC*

It’s always good to hear from one our sisters in St. Francis.

Sister said something that caught my attention. "I would hope that there would be allowances made for information for various orders…(here) there is such a variety of callings in the Church… "

I remember reading so many threads on the vocation forum where people go to town on a religious community or a particular diocesan seminary. The comments are usuallly the same. This one is too traditional or that one is too liberal. The point is that it’s Jesus who does the calling and it is he who will strengthen and sanctify each of us where he calls us, whether it is to the Jesuits, Dominicans, a diocese, the diaconate or to marriage.

When I was discerning, it was a toss up between Franciscans or Cistercians. I never looked in the direction of the Jesuits. I had been educated by Christian Brothers and diocesan priests in college. I knew they were not for me. I had Dominicans as neighbors and they never attracted my attention. But I’m very happy that there was never anyone to tell me how horrible the Jesuits are or how orthodox the Dominicans are. Once I was sent to Rome to study theology, guess what happened? I was in classrooms with all of them. Then I finished formation and it was time to go out to our local community houses. Guess what again? I had to serve in dioceeses and on teams with all of them again.

I have never met one of these guys whom I did not like or whom I did not appreciate for one reason or another. We don’t always agree on everything. However, we owe it to the Church to work together as brothers. Prejudices make fraternal cooperation very difficult and in the end, it’s the local people who suffer.

I find that the best option when someone asks about this or that congregation or seminary is to encourage them to go see for themselves. They may feel at home or they may not. That’s up to Christ to make it happen or not. My role is to encourage the person to explore what is possible for them. As Sister said, there are so many possibilities. Let’s work together to encourage people who are looking at them, even if they are not what I would do. It’s important to put all of these wonderful people who are searching in Mary’s hands. She leads all men to her son.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[otjm]

Like my biggest pet peeve here at the forum. Whenever a man mentions that he feels a call to Carmel there are multiple posts that he should consider the Wyoming Carmelites, yet they are not part of the Carmelite Order nor are they a religious order at all, they are an association of the faithful of diocesen right.

People mean well, they just don’t always know.

Hey - go easy! I am 64, consider myself to be reasonably educated about the Church, came across these folks and had no idea they are an association of the faithful of diocesan right - whatever that means.

Most people simply have very very little exposure to the intricacies of religious life, almost no exposure to the titles of various groups and what they mean, and take groups at face value. They call themselves Carmelites; they don’t offer all sorts of disclaimers as to who they are or are not and what shirt-tale type relationship they might have to someone else who call themselves Carmelites, and all I am trying to do is get my caffeine fix and support a group of men who seem to be seeking God.

Further, in these forae, one is likely to meet people who have even less exposure than I do. I can sympathize if someone does not listen; but some times people’s eyes glaze over when the intricacies start to fly from the insiders. Someone young and with more enthusiasm than exposure may not catch on that such issues are important. Or to whom they are important - as in, insiders.

And by the way - they may not be Carmelites (although they call themselves that); but unless they are rogue, how significant a fact is that to someone trying to discern a vocation, is seeking God, and knows precious little about the true Camelites and the psuedo ones? If the one seeking is looking for a group of men seeking God within the general confines of the Catholic Church, and are drawn toward a contemplative life far from the madding crowd, is it really significant that they are an association of the faithful of diocesan right rather than part of a religious order?

 

[JReducation]

Hey - go easy! I am 64, consider myself to be reasonably educated about the Church, came across these folks and had no idea they are an association of the faithful of diocesan right - whatever that means.

Most people simply have very very little exposure to the intricacies of religious life, almost no exposure to the titles of various groups and what they mean, and take groups at face value. They call themselves Carmelites; they don’t offer all sorts of disclaimers as to who they are or are not and what shirt-tale type relationship they might have to someone else who call themselves Carmelites, and all I am trying to do is get my caffeine fix and support a group of men who seem to be seeking God.

Further, in these forae, one is likely to meet people who have even less exposure than I do. I can sympathize if someone does not listen; but some times people’s eyes glaze over when the intricacies start to fly from the insiders. Someone young and with more enthusiasm than exposure may not catch on that such issues are important. Or to whom they are important - as in, insiders.

And by the way - they may not be Carmelites (although they call themselves that); but unless they are rogue, how significant a fact is that to someone trying to discern a vocation, is seeking God, and knows precious little about the true Camelites and the psuedo ones? If the one seeking is looking for a group of men seeking God within the general confines of the Catholic Church, and are drawn toward a contemplative life far from the madding crowd, is it really significant that they are an association of the faithful of diocesan right rather than part of a religious order?

Let me see if I can help here. I understand what you’re saying. It has validity. Those seeking to serve God, whether it’s in an order or an association of diocesan right, are still seeking to serve God. The value of that cannot and should not be unerestimated.

I can also see what Brother David is saying. The monks of Wyoming are a good example. They are Carmelite in as far as they follow the Carmelite spirit. This is the only thing that they claim, if one reads their writings. They do not claim to be the Carmelite Order. They don’t even claim to be an order or a congregation. They are an autonomous monastery under the jurisdiction of the local bishop.

How does this affect the individual? It is important for the individual to know that he’s not joining the Carmelite Order. With membership in the Carmelite Order there come a whole list of privileges and obligations that are not part of membership in the Monks of Our Lady of Mt. Carmel, which is actually their proper title. The Carmelites are the Brothers of Our Lady of Mt.Carmel. They are an exempt mendicant clerical order of solemn vows. This gives them a very special canonical place in the Church that no one else can occupy. With that place come special graces that no one else can access. Also, there are duties to which no one else is called. If someone says that they want to be Carmelites, then the place to send them is to the Carmelite Order, not the monks of Our Layd of Mt. Carmel Monastery.

What we are saying is that it is important to listen to the religious and diocesan clerics who post on the vocation forum so that one understands what is involved in memberhsip in either the Carmelite Monks, the diocesan seminary, the 112 Francisan orders and congregations, the 1,000 or more religious congregations in the Church. Each has a unique status, role, rights, duties, and spritual benefits. It becomes very diffcult when people don’t listen to the explanations.

From my personal point of view, it also makes the vocation forum very boring. One of the most interesting aspects of a vocation forum is exploring and learning about the different gifts that the Holy Spirit has given to the Church. God is very good and has given us many gifts and many roads to holiness. I would think that even though we can’t follow all of them, we would rejoice in seeing them. To me, the more I know about these roads, the more I feel convinced that God is truly great, loving and merciful. He never ceases to find ways to help us achieve perfection.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[otjm]

Let me see if I can help here. I understand what you’re saying. It has validity. Those seeking to serve God, whether it’s in an order or an association of diocesan rite, are still seeking to serve God. The value of that cannot and should not be unerestimated.

I can also see what Brother David is saying. The monks of Wyoming are a good example. They are Carmelite in as far as they follow the Carmelite spirit. This is what they claim, if one reads their writings. They do not claim to be the Carmelite Order. They don’t even claim to be an order or a congregation. They are an autonomous monastery under the jurisdiction of the local bishop.

How does this affect the individual? It is important for the individual to know that he’s not joining the Carmelite Order. With membership in the Carmelite Order their come a whole list of privileges and obligations that are not part of membership in the Monks of Our Lady of Mt. Carmel, which is actually their proper title. The Carmelites are the Brothers of Our Lady of Mt.Carmel. They are an exempt mendicant clerical order of solemn vows. This gives them a very special canonical place in the Church that no one else can occupy. With that place come special graces that no one else can access. Also, there are duties to which no one else is called.

What we are saying is that it is important to listen to the religious and diocesan clerics who post on the vocation forum so that one understands what is involved in memberhsip in either the Carmelite Monks, the diocesan seminary, the 112 Francisan ordres and congregations, the 1,000 o more religious congregations in the Church. Each has a unique status, role, rights, duties, and spritual benefits. It becomes very diffcult when people don’t listen to the explanations.

From my personal point of view, it also makes the vocation thread very boring. One of the most interesting aspects of a vocation forum is exploring and learning about the different gifts that the Holy Spirit has given to the Church. God is very good and has given us many gifts and many roads to holiness. I would think that even though we can’t follow all of them, we would rejoice in seeing them. To me, the more I know about these roads, the more I feel convinces that God is truly great, loving and merciful. He never ceases to find ways to help us achieve perfection.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

My comment was meant to be in part, tongue in cheek. I had not recommended them to anyone (at least, as I recall); they came up in a discussion and I pm’ed the poster asking about them.

However, there is some truth in what I say; you and Bro. David are in religious communities, and I would suspect that you both, and many of your confreres, are far more knowledgeable, and for that matter, interested in, the intricacies of religious communities than the average poster - or for that matter, the average Catholic.

As to your original post, a lot of the people you are speaking to are still significantly wet behind the ears. Many have stars in their eyes; reality has not yet set in, and they are not sure what part of their anatomy their seat of the pants is associated with. If they don’t know the questions to ask - even the most basic ones - listening to you can take on the aspect of trying to get a drink from a fire hose. You have been there so long, you have forgotten how naive naive is. And that can result in a good degree of frustration.
Coupled with that is the fact that a lot of people have not been taught to listen. Let alone think critically.

First thing we do, we shoot all the tv’s.

Next, we take a 3# sledge to the cell phones…

Keep on truckin’!