There may be interested in reading an essay, A Call To Religious Life Worldwide, on the crisis in numbers in religious orders written by Jose Maria Vigil, a priest from Spain working in Central America, who uses the SEE, JUDGE, ACT methodology to try to determine ways to address the present trend. Below is one of his concluding paragraphs. To read the whole essay go to
http://eapi.admu.edu.ph/eapr006/josemariavigil.htm
This is not the time to pause and listen nostalgically to the hymn Nearer, My God, To Thee being sung on the stern of the Titanic. We have to learn how to move beyond the past and launch out into the future. We have to stop trying to fix what cannot be fixed and clothe ourselves in new life.
Re-establish or recast? We see that re-establishment is not the answer. The events of the past 15 years show the failure of the attempts of re-establishment within the system. We must recast the heavy metal that weighs us down, recast it in the furnace, form new molds, recast it outside the system so that instead of being crushed it can have a possible future. We do not need any more attempts at re-establishment, of repeating the past; what we need is a mutation, a substantial change.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Monday, May 10, 2010
Sandra Schneiders essay
In this essay Sandra makes a very comprehensive defense of the women religious of the US against the Vatican visitation, and she explains how religious congregations are prophetic witnesses...a long read but worth the time.
http://ncronline.org/news/women/religious-life-prophetic-life-form
http://ncronline.org/news/women/religious-life-prophetic-life-form
Sunday, January 3, 2010
Religious Life and eco-spirituality
RELIGIOUS LIFE AND ECOLOGY
During the past twenty years there has been a lot of talk and writing about ecology, about going green and about energy use. Arguments are proposed about reasons for recycling cans and buying gas-saving cars and even for eating more vegetables! As vowed religious, we should not be thinking, talking and reflecting on these issues as if these types of action and practice were the extent of our responsibility to read the signs of the times. There’s got to be more to it.
In all aspects of the ecological movement there are competing and contradictory arguments related to the issue of rights, the question of whether or not humans are destroying planet earth, and the economics of recycling and reusing everything.
For vowed religious who propose to be some sort of professional trail blazers and truth seekers, we should be reflecting beyond saving cans and energy as important as these actions are. We should be reflecting on the very nature and purpose of humans in consideration of new knowledge and understanding of the origin of the universe and our new cosmological insight.
When founders of religious orders in the 16th and 17th century read the signs of the times they were faced with a subsistence culture which was slow to change and which was poorly organized socially and which was only beginning to understand the scientific principle which allowed humans to know their origin and their place on earth. The founders responded by establishing educational and medical systems to address the great human need of the times.
Since those early centuries religious have participated in the very dynamic process of “development” which brought great progress to many parts of the world at a great price to other parts of our world. Human societies followed the Genesis command to dominate the world and eventually brought civilization to a situation in which competition for scarce resources has created inequity, famine, pollution and alienation from nature.
Too frequently these issues have been addressed in scientific, material and economic terms and less in spiritual terms. What has all of this got to do with God, with meaning and purpose in our lives? Who are we: consumers and users who don’t mind raping the earth no matter the consequences?
“Eco” has become a very popular prefix to a vast number of words and situation. Advertising and business have even adopted it. I want to suggest that vowed religious should emphasize “eco-spirituality” as our specific perspective on everything that business and advertising and even the Sierra Club propose as needing to be “eco”.
The sign of the times to which we religious should respond relates to a vast array of values that go unexamined even when we are in the midst of recycling cans and turning down thermostats. This array starts with patriarchy and moves through a string of values which as professional educators we are lulled into accepting as normal and part of progress, part of the “good life” which we have dedicated our lives to promote.
To say that we live in the midst of a paradigm shift seems not to begin to describe the changes in spirituality that we should be addressing, the task peculiar to our vocation, one that we are privileged to witness in our times.
During the past twenty years there has been a lot of talk and writing about ecology, about going green and about energy use. Arguments are proposed about reasons for recycling cans and buying gas-saving cars and even for eating more vegetables! As vowed religious, we should not be thinking, talking and reflecting on these issues as if these types of action and practice were the extent of our responsibility to read the signs of the times. There’s got to be more to it.
In all aspects of the ecological movement there are competing and contradictory arguments related to the issue of rights, the question of whether or not humans are destroying planet earth, and the economics of recycling and reusing everything.
For vowed religious who propose to be some sort of professional trail blazers and truth seekers, we should be reflecting beyond saving cans and energy as important as these actions are. We should be reflecting on the very nature and purpose of humans in consideration of new knowledge and understanding of the origin of the universe and our new cosmological insight.
When founders of religious orders in the 16th and 17th century read the signs of the times they were faced with a subsistence culture which was slow to change and which was poorly organized socially and which was only beginning to understand the scientific principle which allowed humans to know their origin and their place on earth. The founders responded by establishing educational and medical systems to address the great human need of the times.
Since those early centuries religious have participated in the very dynamic process of “development” which brought great progress to many parts of the world at a great price to other parts of our world. Human societies followed the Genesis command to dominate the world and eventually brought civilization to a situation in which competition for scarce resources has created inequity, famine, pollution and alienation from nature.
Too frequently these issues have been addressed in scientific, material and economic terms and less in spiritual terms. What has all of this got to do with God, with meaning and purpose in our lives? Who are we: consumers and users who don’t mind raping the earth no matter the consequences?
“Eco” has become a very popular prefix to a vast number of words and situation. Advertising and business have even adopted it. I want to suggest that vowed religious should emphasize “eco-spirituality” as our specific perspective on everything that business and advertising and even the Sierra Club propose as needing to be “eco”.
The sign of the times to which we religious should respond relates to a vast array of values that go unexamined even when we are in the midst of recycling cans and turning down thermostats. This array starts with patriarchy and moves through a string of values which as professional educators we are lulled into accepting as normal and part of progress, part of the “good life” which we have dedicated our lives to promote.
To say that we live in the midst of a paradigm shift seems not to begin to describe the changes in spirituality that we should be addressing, the task peculiar to our vocation, one that we are privileged to witness in our times.
Thursday, August 27, 2009
No Brother Provincials by Paul Bredestege
Thanks for the article about the Vatican nixing the possibility of vowed brothers being named superiors of a mixed congregation.
It's a good reminder that we brothers are inferior to the ordained class. Regardless of how educated we are, our life experiences, or leadership abilities, the elevated Princes of the Church enjoy the riches of the Gifts of the Holy Spirit more than we.
Let's face it: we brothers are given just enough understanding, wisdom, counsel, knowledge, etc. to teach, operate schools, take on minor administrative duties, and so on, but not to share in the supreme charisma granted to the ordained and to the Vatican bureaus. How dare we think otherwise?
Even though the ordained in our mixed congregations support, love, and obey brothers as provincials, these priests have obviously been led astray by democratically-infected values or are suffering from some form Modernism.
They and we should be grateful that the chosen Princes of Rome rarely make mistakes, being so close as they are to the very source of Infallibility. But should a mistake be made [note the familiar passive voice], apologies from the H.R.C. Church can wait a few centuries, as in the case of Galileo, etc. Who can be hurt by a little delay?
Let's thank God we are not sisters! The dribble of the Gifts they receive is so low that the Vatican is initiating a secretive, Holy Spirit led investigation as to their usefulness, competence and their obedience to the men of Rome.
But we should not complain. Brothers and Sisters can all take solace in the fact that our lowly status in the Church is based on Gospel truths and Jesus' teachings. How? some may ask. The very fact that we have to ask is strong evidence that we lack the leadership skills to chose our own religious superiors.
Let us pray that enlightenment will come if and when a Vatican authored "official report" on this topic is published and waved under our noses as the Official Church - Holy Spirit-inspired teaching.
Paul B.
It's a good reminder that we brothers are inferior to the ordained class. Regardless of how educated we are, our life experiences, or leadership abilities, the elevated Princes of the Church enjoy the riches of the Gifts of the Holy Spirit more than we.
Let's face it: we brothers are given just enough understanding, wisdom, counsel, knowledge, etc. to teach, operate schools, take on minor administrative duties, and so on, but not to share in the supreme charisma granted to the ordained and to the Vatican bureaus. How dare we think otherwise?
Even though the ordained in our mixed congregations support, love, and obey brothers as provincials, these priests have obviously been led astray by democratically-infected values or are suffering from some form Modernism.
They and we should be grateful that the chosen Princes of Rome rarely make mistakes, being so close as they are to the very source of Infallibility. But should a mistake be made [note the familiar passive voice], apologies from the H.R.C. Church can wait a few centuries, as in the case of Galileo, etc. Who can be hurt by a little delay?
Let's thank God we are not sisters! The dribble of the Gifts they receive is so low that the Vatican is initiating a secretive, Holy Spirit led investigation as to their usefulness, competence and their obedience to the men of Rome.
But we should not complain. Brothers and Sisters can all take solace in the fact that our lowly status in the Church is based on Gospel truths and Jesus' teachings. How? some may ask. The very fact that we have to ask is strong evidence that we lack the leadership skills to chose our own religious superiors.
Let us pray that enlightenment will come if and when a Vatican authored "official report" on this topic is published and waved under our noses as the Official Church - Holy Spirit-inspired teaching.
Paul B.
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Reflections on the Common Bond weekend
Reflections on the 2009 Common Bond meeting
Several hundred former members of the Society of Mary met at the University of Dayton recently for a weekend of remembrance, reflection and ritual. All seemed to agree that it was a great success and there was general concurrence that Common Bonders and members of the Society of Mary have much in common.
What can religious life learn from the fact that hundreds of highly trained, talented and gifted individuals started on the path to perpetual membership and, having determined that it was not the right path for them, were separated from the Great Project, the Society of Mary?
A good education has allowed these men to make outstanding contributions to church and society not only through their own efforts but also through the outstanding families they have produced.
Many members of Common Bond indicate that their initial formation in the postulate, novitiate and as vowed members has had a profound influence on their lives. They consider those years as a strong foundation for what they have been able to achieve in life. Many still pursue our common mission.
Unfortunately the Society of Mary has moved on without their participation even though it invested significant resources in their formation. How can this not be considered a great loss for the mission of the Society? In the past we had sufficient numbers joining which did not require us to reflect on the consequence of the great loss we had experienced.
Speculation about what could have been accomplished had these men continued membership or at least had continued an official relationship may not be a fruitful exercise, but speculation about what could be with a new and creative relationship between the Society and Common Bond members may be appropriate as we continue to strategize how we can continue our mission with ever decreasing numbers of perpetually professed.
The future of religious life, and in particular the Society of Mary in its present form, is in jeopardy. A continuing future may be related to the need to change the idea that making perpetual vows is the basic requirement for membership.
Several hundred former members of the Society of Mary met at the University of Dayton recently for a weekend of remembrance, reflection and ritual. All seemed to agree that it was a great success and there was general concurrence that Common Bonders and members of the Society of Mary have much in common.
What can religious life learn from the fact that hundreds of highly trained, talented and gifted individuals started on the path to perpetual membership and, having determined that it was not the right path for them, were separated from the Great Project, the Society of Mary?
A good education has allowed these men to make outstanding contributions to church and society not only through their own efforts but also through the outstanding families they have produced.
Many members of Common Bond indicate that their initial formation in the postulate, novitiate and as vowed members has had a profound influence on their lives. They consider those years as a strong foundation for what they have been able to achieve in life. Many still pursue our common mission.
Unfortunately the Society of Mary has moved on without their participation even though it invested significant resources in their formation. How can this not be considered a great loss for the mission of the Society? In the past we had sufficient numbers joining which did not require us to reflect on the consequence of the great loss we had experienced.
Speculation about what could have been accomplished had these men continued membership or at least had continued an official relationship may not be a fruitful exercise, but speculation about what could be with a new and creative relationship between the Society and Common Bond members may be appropriate as we continue to strategize how we can continue our mission with ever decreasing numbers of perpetually professed.
The future of religious life, and in particular the Society of Mary in its present form, is in jeopardy. A continuing future may be related to the need to change the idea that making perpetual vows is the basic requirement for membership.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
