Why shouldn't there be fewer people called to the religious life?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lost_Wanderer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I mean let’s face facts. We are not an asexual species. By nature, we have been made by God to reproduce. That’s how we’ve pretty much survived ever since the dawn of civilization. Even St. Paul admitted that those who could not exercise the self-control demanded by religious celibacy, should marry instead. I cannot say I’m naive enough to believe that 90% percent of the human race (me included) are capable of such self-control.
religious life and celibacy isn’t determined by self control but by grace… it’s a supernatural gift from God. If He calls someone to such a life, He will also offer them the grace to live it.
 
religious life and celibacy isn’t determined by self control but by grace… it’s a supernatural gift from God. If He calls someone to such a life, He will also offer them the grace to live it.
The founders of the five religious orders in the Church taught that it’s actually a combination of grace and internal discipline. That’s where the term “Grace builds on nature” was first applied, by the Desert Fathers, who were in fact the first religious brothers in the history of the Church. Long after them, came celibate priests and long after that came regular priests or priests who joined the religious life.

Anyway, the point is that in all five rules that exist in the Church: Basilian, Carmelite, Benedictine, Franciscan and Augustinian they all mention the necessity of discipline for grace to work. Grace will not operate if there is no internal discipline. said the five authors of the only religious rules that exist in the Catholic and Orthdox Churches: Basil, Benedict, Albert, Francis and Augustine.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Wow, I’m really loving this thread. I totally agree with Br. JR about the rise of great saints in times of crisis. I especially agree on the part about the Francis and Dominic (or the two people who will remind us of them). I’ve increasingly grown in that conviction and I can’t wait to find out who they are.

I also find myself in the discussion on Francis and Teresa. Teresa of Avila was my confirmation saint and I am joining a group of great Franciscan sisters/nuns. Plus, I know a great new bunch of Franciscan brothers. They’re awesome!!! I’d love to read that dissertation lol.

I’m really learning a lot on this thread. Keep up the posts and I’ll (name removed by moderator)ut what I can. 🙂

Jessica
 
Wow, I’m really loving this thread. I totally agree with Br. JR about the rise of great saints in times of crisis. I especially agree on the part about the Francis and Dominic (or the two people who will remind us of them). I’ve increasingly grown in that conviction and I can’t wait to find out who they are.

I also find myself in the discussion on Francis and Teresa. Teresa of Avila was my confirmation saint and I am joining a group of great Franciscan sisters/nuns. Plus, I know a great new bunch of Franciscan brothers. They’re awesome!!! I’d love to read that dissertation lol.

I’m really learning a lot on this thread. Keep up the posts and I’ll (name removed by moderator)ut what I can. 🙂

Jessica
You have a great combination of spiritual masters here. Teresa is certainly the master on contemplation and Francis is the master on immitation of Christ. If you follow them together, you’ll be in good shape. Pray for me.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
religious life and celibacy isn’t determined by self control but by grace… it’s a supernatural gift from God. If He calls someone to such a life, He will also offer them the grace to live it.
And may I add that grace builds also on our efforts to avoid occasions of sins against chastity and celibacy.
 
And may I add that grace builds also on our efforts to avoid occasions of sins against chastity and celibacy.
This is what we have traditionally called the cooperation between actual and sanctifying grace.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
You make a good point. Everyody assumes that the reason there are less Priests/people in religious life is because of some sort of crisis, where people for some reason or another aren’t heeding God’s call. But really, what do we know? I find it just as possible that God is simply calling less people.
 
You make a good point. Everyody assumes that the reason there are less Priests/people in religious life is because of some sort of crisis, where people for some reason or another aren’t heeding God’s call. But really, what do we know? I find it just as possible that God is simply calling less people.
I do believe that the call to either Holy Orders or to religious life is not for the majority. It’s like the followers of Jesus. Not all of them were called to be Apostles, only 12 were. The same thing happened with consecrated virgins. How many consecrated virgins do you see in the Gospels: Mary. That’s it. The same with consecrated religious. During the first generation of Christians how many became hermits and went to the desert? No many. This call was always for a minority. It is a sign of God’s mercy, not of man’s merit.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Hmm, the thread has strayed a little from the original topic, great though the discussion is.

Seems LW was originally asking as much about men being called to the priesthood as men (and women) being called to the religious life. I can’t speak much to the religious life, so I leave that to our more knowledgeable Brother JR.

In terms of the priesthood, though, one short but compelling answer is that there are currently not anywhere near enough priests to provide the sacraments (Eucharist, confession, last rites) to those who are in need of them. I’ve seen this in my parents’ relatively remote parish where, far too frequently, there is no priest available to say Sunday Mass and parishioners must have a lay-led Sunday liturgy instead.

Indeed there is a thread on the fora at the moment about a poor housebound soul whose priest refuses to visit to hear his or her confession - ever - citing lack of time to do so as the reason, and for the same reason rarely visits the local hospital to provide last rites to those who need them.

That, certainly, is a deplorable side-effect of the drop in vocations, and one which must be remedied.
 
Hmm, the thread has strayed a little from the original topic, great though the discussion is.

Seems LW was originally asking as much about men being called to the priesthood as men (and women) being called to the religious life. I can’t speak much to the religious life, so I leave that to our more knowledgeable Brother JR.

In terms of the priesthood, though, one short but compelling answer is that there are currently not anywhere near enough priests to provide the sacraments (Eucharist, confession, last rites) to those who are in need of them. I’ve seen this in my parents’ relatively remote parish where, far too frequently, there is no priest available to say Sunday Mass and parishioners must have a lay-led Sunday liturgy instead.

Indeed there is a thread on the fora at the moment about a poor housebound soul whose priest refuses to visit to hear his or her confession - ever - citing lack of time to do so as the reason, and for the same reason rarely visits the local hospital to provide last rites to those who need them.

That, certainly, is a deplorable side-effect of the drop in vocations, and one which must be remedied.
There is a definite shortage of priests and it’s going to get more serious. What is happening now is that religious orders are doing two things: 1) Some are refusing to ordain as many men as we did in the past, because we don’t need so many priests for our communities and 2) many religious orders of men are pulling out of parishes, because our founders did not intend for us to be in parishes. We’re closing parishes or leaving them open with no staff. It’s up to the bishop to decide what he want us to do. I’m referring to the parishes. He can’t tell religious men what to do with their lives. He certainly cannot order religious superiors to ordain more men or to stay in the parishes. He can’t suppress the religious in hid diocese. That’s a grave sin.

If you watch EWTN, I believe that only one of the priests who is on EWTN is a parish priest. None of the others are parish priests. They all belong to religiuos orders and their superiors will not assign them to parishes. Fr. Corapi has never been in a parish. Fr. Benedict G. has never been in a parish and neither have the Franciscans of the Renewal. The Franciscans of the Eternal Word have never been in a parish and have no plans to ever be in parish work. Plus they ordain very few men, only enough for their friars and for the nuns. Fr. Mitch has never been in a parish. Fr. Brian Mullady has never been there. Msgr. Streackland (sp?) has never been in onw. I believe that the only one who is a parish priest is the former Anglican, whose name I can’t recall.

All of the religious are part of the new “no parish” religious. I call them “no parish religious” because the younger generaion of religious wants to live religious life. Those who ask for ordination really enjoy going to a chapel or parish to say a Sunday mass or hear confessions and leave. They want to be back in their religious houses.

This means that we have to find secular men who want to remain secular men so that we can ordain them to the priesthood. The parish is properly the ministry of the secular priest.

The good news is that there are some dioceses that have no shortage of secular priests. But these are not large dioceses. They don’t cover large areas. I know that Arlington, VA has three to five priests in every parish. Arlington Diocese is very small, but very rich in vocations. Boston has two to three secular priests in every parish. But it’s not an extensive diocese. It has a large population, not a large geographical area. Because of Cardinal Sean, at least five branches of the Franciscan order have volunteered to take on parisshes in that diocese. But I’m not so sure that they’ll stay when he retires. They are really very attached to him. They went there because he is very much loved by the friars, the same for Denver. Archbishop Chaput is a friar and the friars are willing to do anything to suppor their brother. This is als true in Australia. Cardinal Pell has a strong following of Dominicans who are very attached to him, because it’s his order.

We can’t count on religious men taking over parishes or staying in them. There is also the problem of what to do with the Middle Class and higher. Many of us are not allowed to serve the Middle Class or higher. We did it for a long time as a favor to the bishops. These communities began as very poor communities that made a lot of progress, which is good. We want people to move ahead.

For exmaple, some communities have it in their rule that when the Catholics reach the Middle Class, the religious must move out and they must hand those people over to the secular clergy. When there is not secular clergy, then there is a problem. We have to promote vocations to the secular diaconate and secular priesthood.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
This is als true in Australia. Cardinal Pell has a strong following of Dominicans who are very attached to him, because it’s his order.
Yah, as a Sydneysider I’ve noticed. :yup:

Sometimes I attend weekday Mass at the chapel in the Archdiocesan offices, and there do seem to be a lot of Dominicans (particularly Dominican nuns) about! 😃 Not to mention they have been a strong presence in the nearby parish of St Benedicts in Broadway.

Great bunch of priests, especially good as confessors. Perhaps since my own spiritual leanings are Franciscan I should be a bit jealous 😉
 
Yah, as a Sydneysider I’ve noticed. :yup:

Sometimes I attend weekday Mass at the chapel in the Archdiocesan offices, and there do seem to be a lot of Dominicans (particularly Dominican nuns) about! 😃 Not to mention they have been a strong presence in the nearby parish of St Benedicts in Broadway.

Great bunch of priests, especially good as confessors. Perhaps since my own spiritual leanings are Franciscan I should be a bit jealous 😉
The mendicants, especially the Dominicans and Franciscans have been tuaght by their founders to love their borthers above everything else (except God of course). For Dominic and Francis, even our service to the Church was to be regulated by our life in community and our attachment to our brothers.

When one of our brothers is a bishop, we make exceptions and we take on any ministry that will help him. This was done to protect our bishops from the laity. The idea was for the Dominicans and Franciscans to surround their bishops so they had as little contact as possible with the laity. When our two orders were founded the aristocracy has a lot of power over the local bishop. If you put a buffer between the bishop and them,you could protect him from being contaminated. Don’t forget the corruption of bishops by power and money.

The situation may have changed. We no longer have a powerful aristocracy, but when something becomes an ingrained tradition, it’s hard to break out of it. I have found that our bishops love it, because it helps feel that they still belong to the community and that they are loved by their brothers and sisters.

Don’t be surprised if once Cardnal Pell retires, the Dominicans begin to withdraw, unless the new bishop is Dominican friendly.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top