<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Thursday, August 26, 2004

Religious Life: what the post-conciliar crowds may have missed My mind was caught at Mass this morning, looking out at all the kids from the school, having just heard a petition for religious vocations. Are we missing a whole category of people who don't make the jump to consider religious life a possibility? Men, obviously. First off, men seem far less inclined to religious witness than women. A cynic might say the only reason men are involved at all in religious life is because they have the option of ordination, and the specialness that comes from that life. I'm not that cynical yet, but the undeniable fact is that in non-ordained religious life, women outnumber men substantially. And they probably always have. Is it nature? Is it nurture? I don't know. But it seems out of kilter. Maybe some religious orders are too self-focused. They don't reach out to visitors. They don't exemplify hospitality. The Benedictines at Conception might be an exception. Abbot Gregory reports that in the two years since the tragic shootings there, the community has been embraced and has reached out. I think he said something like twelve serious candidates/postulants have come. The Christian response, the radical response to tragedy and violence probably strikes a positive chord in people who find the violence and tragedy of the world to be non-sensical. I suspect this is why "traditional" orders find themselves doing well: they offer a significantly different approach to life, a radical approach, if you will. My take: holiness as a way of life for the laity: when that fails, vocations are cut off at the knees. How can one expect to harvest in a secularized, materialistic, even conservative world? When I was in the post-college discernment group in my diocese in 1982, the director asked me if I wanted to be available to be put on mailing lists for various orders. "Sure," I said. The last time I got that much mail was when I was searching for colleges. Jesuits, Franciscans, Carmelites, Benedictines, Maryknolls, the orders I knew and the ones I didn't know all came out of the woodwork sending me brochures, letters, invitations, and whatnot. What tipped the scales for me to remain a lay person. A few things. First, I was in my early twenties, and I didn't feel mature enough to make a commitment. (My dating life was largely the same until the mid-90's) Second, there wasn't a single trustworthy figure who really challenged me to consider religious life. I found many aspects appealing: Jesuit intellectualism, Trappist simplicity, Benedictine liturgy, and especially Third World mission work. But third, nobody had everything I was seeking. I was reading the Rule of Benedict, and it struck me: why not live this rule out as a lay person? Would it work as a family person with a wife and children? Would it work in a commune? I came to the realization that whatever path my life would take, holiness would be a given. I could decide to be an ordinary lay person, or something else, but my primary effort at the time (1983) was to strive for a holy life. I think that is essentially the post-conciliar approach for Catholicism: the holiness of the baptized life. The more this is emphasized, the more needed vocations will come.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

The Alliance for Moderate, Liberal and Progressive Blogs

Join | List | Previous | Next