Thread: The Loss of the Religious Life Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.
To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=023811
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
I've just heard that St Edward's House in Westminster has been sold to Westminster School to be converted into a new boarding house, thus closing the last British house of the Society of Saint John the Evangelist (SSJE).
Why is it, do you think, that Anglican religious orders still appear to be in decline (particularly the male ones) when the Catholic Church is experiencing something of a revival? I wonder whether it's because, under Benedict XVI, it's largely the traditionalist orders that are expanding, whereas young traditionalists in the C of E are less likely to want to take life vows in a church that has such unresolved issues and which is constantly changing.
Any thoughts?
Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on
:
Please give the source of your claim that Roman Catholic religious communities are seeing increases in membership.
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
Well, it is largely based on my own experiences, but the more traditionalist orders I've come across do seem to have had a good few vocations in the last few years. The English Dominicans have a steady flow of novices, Downside, Ampleforth and Douai all have novices and/or juniors, the Transalpine Redemptorists in the Orkneys continue to grow and the Norbertines in Chelmsford had their third profession in four years last Monday.
Enough for you?
Posted by Oferyas (# 14031) on
:
I saw one example recently: the international website of the Order of Preachers (Dominicans) highlights the steady increase in the number of vocations they are experiencing.
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
(I should probably make it clear that I was referring to the Catholic Church in the UK, as a more direct comparison to the Church of England.)
Posted by tclune (# 7959) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
Enough for you?
Of course not. You wouldn't take the fact that your neighbor had a baby this year as proof that the world's population is increasing.
--Tom Clune
[ 12. July 2012, 18:39: Message edited by: tclune ]
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
Well, my point was more about the decline of Anglican religious than the increas of Roman Catholic orders...
Posted by Raptor Eye (# 16649) on
:
I wonder whether it has something to do with the disproportionate influx of women now that their calling to ministry is being recognised, so that the C of E is currently out of balance.
Religious orders in the C of E have surely been few in any case since Henry VIII?
Posted by tclune (# 7959) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
Well, my point was more about the decline of Anglican religious than the increas of Roman Catholic orders...
I guess I misinterpreted your intentions. You appeared to be suggesting that the Anglicans were doing something wrong and the Catholics were doing something right. While that may be true, the insinuation that this can be gleaned from increasing or decreasing numbers is always suspect. Combine that with the increase or decrease being based on a feeling rather than a statistic, and the house of cards gets awfully tenuous.
--Tom Clune
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
Tom - I apologise; I can see how my original post could easily be interpreted that way.
Raptor - well, they all disappeared after the Reformation, but then orders for women reappeared in the 1840s and SSJE was the first of the new male orders, in the 1860s. There are still some around, such as the Franciscans, Alton and Elmore Abbeys (both Bendictine) and the Community of the Resurrection at Mirfield, for example, but the Cistercians at Ewell, SSJE in Oxford and London and the Society of the Sacred Mision at Kelham have all just about disappeared.
Posted by (S)pike couchant (# 17199) on
:
It is, and it's one of the great tragedies of the Church of England's recent history. It is perhaps unsurprising that Betjeman, whose poetry chronicles so neatly the decline of the Church from its highpoint ('Those were the days when that divine baroque/ Transformed our English altars and our ways.') through the disasters that began later twentieth century and continue to this day, should have written a wonderful gem of a poem on this subject:
Felixstowe, or the last of her order
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
Oh yes, I'd forgotten that poem. I remember being called upon to explain the church references in A Level Engish lessons!
Rowan Williams described the religious life as 'the best kept secret in the Church of England', and though I have a great respect for his opinions I cannot see how that is a good thing - the lack of discussion about religious vocation is surely the life's greatest weakness?
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
I wonder whether it has something to do with the disproportionate influx of women now that their calling to ministry is being recognised, so that the C of E is currently out of balance.
from my pov, it's hard to see that state of affairs as "out of balance". It seems rather to be "finally balanced", or at least "more balanced".
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
Why should a 'disproportionate influx of women' (whatever one's opinion of the OOW) have any effect on men's orders? Women's orders remain much more numerous.
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
Maybe it's just a subjective impression I've got, but it often seems to me that the more 'traditional' parts of anglo-catholicism have little interest in or contact with the religious life. Most Anglican orders, both of men and women, grew out of the Oxford Movement, but few members thereof these days would identify with the conservative FinF tendency.
There are many new religious orders, here or elsewhere in Europe, either those committed to the traditional vows especially celibacy, or 'new patterns' of monasticism including married people. Mostly they are ecumenical in ethos, like Taizé, or the Chemin Neuf community. Traditional orders are finding increasing numbers of people drawn to them as oblates, third order members or similar.
The community of which I have most knowledge is the Community of the Resurrection at Mirfield. While its membership is not much more than a quarter of that in its heyday, it is in good heart, with a couple of novices and several enquiries in the pipeline.
The triumphalist days of the 1950s are well behind us, but the monastic movement has been a crucial part of the life of the Church since the earliest days and it will survive if God wants it (which I am sure She does). But Anglican orders need to be a bit more proactive about making themselves known, so that it is no longer 'the best-kept secret'. Parishes, and diocesan vocations advisers, can help a great deal by keeping that awareness before people.
Posted by Raptor Eye (# 16649) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
Why should a 'disproportionate influx of women' (whatever one's opinion of the OOW) have any effect on men's orders? Women's orders remain much more numerous.
ISTM that it may have an effect on the perception of and attitudes toward the organisation as a whole where there has been a surge of female influence into a previously male-dominated culture, which has not yet settled into a balanced normality.
Those men called by God into a religious order may naturally migrate to an organisation which remains male-dominated?
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
Why should a 'disproportionate influx of women' (whatever one's opinion of the OOW) have any effect on men's orders? Women's orders remain much more numerous.
ISTM that it may have an effect on the perception of and attitudes toward the organisation as a whole where there has been a surge of female influence into a previously male-dominated culture, which has not yet settled into a balanced normality.
Those men called by God into a religious order may naturally migrate to an organisation which remains male-dominated?
Do you have an organisation in mind?
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
I wonder whether it has something to do with the disproportionate influx of women now that their calling to ministry is being recognised, so that the C of E is currently out of balance.
I don't know what this has to do with men's orders. Certainly one could argue that before OoW women with a vocation to full-time ministry might best fulfil it by joining an order.
An interesting angle on this debate might be One Foot in Eden by Alan Wilkinson. It is a novel telling the story of a young Anglican priest in the 1950s who became a monk and eventually the Superior of his community. It wouldn't win any prizes for literary merit but it is a very sensitive portrayal of how the Religious life flourished and survived in the C of E through the social, theological and liturgical changes of the 1960s and later.
Posted by Qoheleth. (# 9265) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
There are still some around, such as the Franciscans, Alton and Elmore Abbeys (both Bendictine) ...
Alton received one novice in First Vows last week, with another novice and postulant in community. The Elmore community, of course, is now at Salisbury Priory.
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
Yes, I saw that - wonderful news.
Posted by Qoheleth. (# 9265) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Qoheleth.:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
There are still some around, such as the Franciscans, Alton and Elmore Abbeys (both Bendictine) ...
Alton received one novice in First Vows last week, with another novice and postulant in community. The Elmore community, of course, is now at Salisbury Priory.
And let's not leave out Mucknell, also with a recent novice.
Posted by Shire Dweller (# 16631) on
:
No mention has yet been made of Mucknell Abbey.
They relocated from Oxfordshire to Worcestershire and have developed a small(ish) monastery there.
I know little about them other than their website though.
Cross posted, sorry!
[ 12. July 2012, 21:05: Message edited by: Shire Dweller ]
Posted by Joan Rasch (# 49) on
:
I've got to note that while SSJE in the UK may closing its house, SSJE in North America (link here) is thriving. I worship at their chapel in Cambridge, MA every Sunday, along with an average of at least 50 other guests. In the last few months, I have witnessed one monk making initial vows, three novices clothed, another postulant in residence, and at least one more likely to arrive in the next couple of months. I could also mention the VERY successful program the past 9 months with 5 interns (both men and women) in residence both in Cambridge and at the rural site (Emory House). We all continue to enjoy the many happy results of the complete overhaul of the Cambridge Monastery and guest house.
As you will see by the website, SSJE is also very active in the on-line world.
What's their secret - I would say that on the one hand they are very centered in their life of prayer under their Rule, but are also very welcoming to guests and friends as well.
- Joan
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
Thanks Joan, I remember meeting a couple of SSJE brothers who were visiting Oxford a few years ago. It's interesting to see how the British and American provinces of the order have developed in such different ways over the years.
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Shire Dweller:
No mention has yet been made of Mucknell Abbey.
....
I know little about them other than their website though.
From which it is interesting to note that their most recently professed brother is a Methodist presbyter 'in full connexion'.
Posted by TurquoiseTastic (# 8978) on
:
I think it's a numbers thing. CoE numbers are none too high, and AC congregations are (I think) a rather lower proportion of the CoE than they used to be. The pool of possible Anglican monastics will come primarily from AC congregations, so you would expect the number of vocations to have dropped off.
Posted by jlav12 (# 17148) on
:
This is entirely a personal opinion but I think the English Reformation and especially the publication of the Prayer Book made religious orders superfluous. The Prayer Book sought to eliminate the distinction between religious and secular by providing a common Office that was intended for everyone. Added to that there wasn't an Anglican expression of monasticism for ~300 years (~1535-~1835), which contained the "classical" Anglican period.
Posted by Spiffy (# 5267) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
Why is it, do you think, that Anglican religious orders still appear to be in decline (particularly the male ones) when the Catholic Church is experiencing something of a revival?
This is just my observations, via being a long time reader of the blogs of a small smattering of US RC female orders, but I see a lot of women going in as postulants, but only a tiny fraction of them making it all the way to junior professed. Even then, I've seen a few who were JP not go on to life profession.
A conjecture, from the way I've heard some of these women talk, and talking to my RC female friends, is that if you're a woman who even shows the littlest inkling of interest in Roman Catholicism, you're pressed pretty hard to find your vocation in the monastery by priests and well meaning laypeople.
My experience as a woman who has shown the littlest inkling of interest in the Episcopal Church is that priests and well meaning laypeople keep asking me when I'm going to postulate for the priesthood. I'm usually the one in the room who knows more about Episcopal monastics than anyone else.
(And I'm also about this close to getting a t-shirt printed up that says "Called to the Laity" because I am fed right up with people assuming the diaconate and priesthood are merely the next steps in the career path towards being a Good Christian.)
Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on
:
I'd love that tee-shirt! ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Posted by tomsk (# 15370) on
:
Boat Boy, would setting the numbers joining the religious life be better considered in the context of the numbers joining the priesthood? I gather that for the Catholics in the UK those numbers aren't too healthy.
There are also different forms of community (Iona, Lee Abbey).
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
The pool of possible Anglican monastics will come primarily from AC congregations,
Not necessarily. See my post above.
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by jlav12:
This is entirely a personal opinion but I think the English Reformation and especially the publication of the Prayer Book made religious orders superfluous. The Prayer Book sought to eliminate the distinction between religious and secular by providing a common Office that was intended for everyone.
Which might have worked if 'everyone' used it! The experiment lasted, as you say, for about 300 years but the need for religious orders eventually manifested itself.
Posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd) (# 12163) on
:
Roman Catholic religious orders, such as the Carmelites, talk about their "charism", which I take as the particular way of approaching and apprehending the Divine Grace they are gifted with as exemplified by their great saints, such as St John of the Cross and St Theresa of Avila.
Orthodox monks and nuns also have a clear idea of their mission, which is to dedicate their lives to hesychia, which is a thoroughly ascetic prayer life.
I think the heyday of Anglican monastic orders was in the late 19th Century which really represented a sort of Anglo-Catholic high tide.
Different Anglican religious orders seem to have different aims. Up until fairly recently I was connected with a First Order Anglican Franciscan church (SSF). They seemed a fairly stable, if somewhat ageing order, with one novice in Australasia. I believe other Provinces are more flourishing.
The monastic life would seem to be relatively unattractive to many moderns. Celibacy would seem rather counter-cultural these days. Ditto obedience. "Poverty" seems a relative term. More "non-individual ownership" of quite considerable resources.
I do not think there is a huge call to monasticism these days. I did consider becoming a tertiary at one stage but felt the local branch were merely playing games.
My gut feeling is that more and more people will be influenced by religious spirituality, be it Benedictine; Jesuit; Carmelite; whatever but they will tend to integrate it into their own lives, often by using appropriate prayer or devotional books, as there appear to be few genuinely accepted religious exemplars anywhere. Holiness is not gained by mere rote following nor by talk.
Posted by StevHep (# 17198) on
:
I spent some time a few years ago on retreat at the Cistercian monastery on Caldey Island. The buildings had previously been created by an Anglican religious community. Most of what now constitutes the monastic guest housed had originally been the private residence of the Anglican Abbott. The Cistercian Abbot inhabits a cell which is as simple as that of his brothers and this practice is fairly normative in modern Catholic monastic life.
The conclusion that the monks tended to draw from this was that Anglican monasticism suffers from being, in some senses, a self conscious 19th Century creation rather than being an organic, many centuries old tradition. Certainly it draws from the well of tradition but it draws from other sources too, and more specifically Anglican ones, which makes Anglican monasticism a unique experiment which is still in its early days. Give it another thousand years or so and we can begin to draw some solid conclusions about it.
Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
I'd love that tee-shirt!
Another one, although I tend to say I am "vocationally lay"
Jengie
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
SteveHep, I'm not sure I'd agree with you. I know the Mucknell community pretty well (and its previous incarnation at Burford) having been going there for almost 20 yrs now. They seem to me to be deeply rooted in the Rule and in Tradition generally, while aware of modern challenges. Over the years I've seen many people come and go, having tried their vocation, but the core community has grown slowly but surely.
Having visited Caldey several times as well (helping with school retreats in the guest house) I get the impression that the Anglicans there were a bit of an odd bunch. Mind you, that could be said of several figures in the Oxford Movement. I read somewhere that many of its leading lights were very hot on the idea of episcopal obedience - until it was actually applied to them when they screamed blue murder!
Posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd) (# 12163) on
:
I suppose a T-shirt would have to say more than:
"I'm just a lay".
"... laity" doesn't quite crack it.
Perhaps:
"Being laity is a perfectly respectable vocation".
"The church needs laity. Just for the money". ![[Two face]](graemlins/scot_twoface.gif)
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
Hmm, but can one really incorporate religious spirituality in one's own life? Yes, there's a roaring trade in prayer books based on the ideas of Francis or Benedict, but I'm not convinced that it's really possible to incorporate the charism if those orders (well, not the contemplative ones) into every-day life outside the cloister.
I suspect I also agree with the idea that, though Anglican orders follow ancient rules of life, they are also constantly challenged by the context of the wider Anglican church and that therefore makes it much of a challenge to simply 'relax' into the rule and way of life.
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd):
My gut feeling is that more and more people will be influenced by religious spirituality, be it Benedictine; Jesuit; Carmelite; whatever but they will tend to integrate it into their own lives, often by using appropriate prayer or devotional books, as there appear to be few genuinely accepted religious exemplars anywhere. Holiness is not gained by mere rote following nor by talk.
I'm sure that is true, and many lay people are taking Benedictine spirituality, Franciscan spirituality, or what have you into their lives. Either by becoming oblates/associates of communities, or more generally. Esther de Waal has written many books about the Rule of St Benedict and its relevance to everyday life. But ISTM that there will always need to be a core of committed, vowed religious for this wider constituency to relate to.
The peculiar historical circumstances of the 19th century revival in Anglicanism help to explain some of the crazier and more ultramontane expressions of monasticism like Fr Ignatius of Llanthony, and (slightly less crazy) the Benedictines of Caldey. But that age is long gone and no-one would survive two weeks in a modern Anglican monastery or convent if all they wanted to do was act out a medieval fantasy. The days when monks and nuns were trotted out as exotic extras on the set of Anglo-Catholic Congresses are long gone, as is the suspicion of the religious life on the part of all but an equally loony protestant fringe. Taizé and Iona (admittedly not a religious community in the traditional sense) have seen to that. The main problem is a lack of awareness of Anglican religious among many laity and parishes. Parish priests and vocations advisers should do more to publicise them.
Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd):
I suppose a T-shirt would have to say more than:
"I'm just a lay".
"... laity" doesn't quite crack it.
Perhaps:
"Being laity is a perfectly respectable vocation".
"The church needs laity. Just for the money".
Something like this perhaps?
Posted by Justinian (# 5357) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
Why is it, do you think, that Anglican religious orders still appear to be in decline (particularly the male ones) when the Catholic Church is experiencing something of a revival? I wonder whether it's because, under Benedict XVI, it's largely the traditionalist orders that are expanding, whereas young traditionalists in the C of E are less likely to want to take life vows in a church that has such unresolved issues and which is constantly changing.
Any thoughts?
Vision.
As far as I can tell the Anglican Communion has none of what it should be. The goal of liberals in the Anglican Communion appears to be catching up with the surrounding population morally - hardly a vision to inspire someone to devote their life to. The goal of the conservatives at the moment appears to be to try to prevent the liberals from changing anything. And that's no more inspiring.
On the other hand I may emphatically disagree with the RCC but it has a vision of what the world should be like and presents it. And because that's a vision it's something people see and that does encourage people to devote their life to it.
Posted by venbede (# 16669) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Spiffy:
(And I'm also about this close to getting a t-shirt printed up that says "Called to the Laity" because I am fed right up with people assuming the diaconate and priesthood are merely the next steps in the career path towards being a Good Christian.)
Spiffy - that is absolutely wonderful. Totally agree.
The religious life is vitally important.
Betjeman's poem Felixstowe, quoted above, I find deeply moving. The point being surely that the vocation of the nun is most powerful when all the concrete expressions have gone: "Safe from the vain world's silly sympatising, safe with the love that I was born to know".
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
I think there's a general consensus that one of the main causes of the lack of vocations is a lack of publicity, either by communities or by parishes and dioceses that wish to support them.
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
Agreed. I don't think I've ever worshipped at a church which has even mentioned vocations to the religious life as something that might suit some people, let alone actively sought to foster them. It might just be that I attend the 'wrong' sort of churches for that kind of thing, of course, but IME the CofE/CinW is, with a few honourable exceptions, actually pretty lousy at actively fostering vocations to more 'mainstream' ministry too, so being a monk or nun isn't really going to get much of a look in at all.
Posted by (S)pike couchant (# 17199) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Agreed. I don't think I've ever worshipped at a church which has even mentioned vocations to the religious life as something that might suit some people, let alone actively sought to foster them.
Really? I'm pretty sure that 'vocations to the priesthood, diaconate, and religious life' was mentioned in the prayers at Benediction last time I went. I will concede, however, that vocations to the religious life are mentioned far less frequently than those to the priesthood. Every parish I've ever attended has had pamphlets and posters about priestly vocations. The most common one, which I think comes from the ACS, has a picture of a man in a chasuble and says something like 'called to serve and to lead: at the altar, in the pulpit, amongst the people'. This focus is understandable and appropriate give the serious priest shortage faced by the Church of England, but it does mean that the religious life tends to get sidelined.
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
I'd agree partially with both of you - I've been to many Anglican (usually FinF types) that have ACS posters and the like amongst the leaflets at the back, but I can't ever remember anyone prompting a consideration of religious vocation. Secular priesthood, yes, but not the religious life. That includes the likes of Pusey House where, one would hope, such orders would have great support. The only times I've ever been able to seriously discuss it have been when I've bumped into religious (we had a CR Father running a mission at the school in which I teach this year).
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
FinF and ACS are hardly likely to encourage people to visit Anglican religious communities since they will inevitably encounter monks and nuns who are enthusiastic supporters of women in the priesthood, and indeed the latter may very often be such.
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
I'm sure FinF is more actively supportive of religious communities than any other society or identifiable group in the CofE, though of course that is purely conjecture...
Posted by (S)pike couchant (# 17199) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
FinF and ACS are hardly likely to encourage people to visit Anglican religious communities since they will inevitably encounter monks and nuns who are enthusiastic supporters of women in the priesthood, and indeed the latter may very often be such.
I don't think that's true at all. In fact, I think it's categorically untrue. Most Anglo-Catholic parishes maintain links to religious communities. I know for a fact that Pusey House does, and I believe the Holy Week preacher at Bourne Street this year was a member of the Community of the Resurrection.
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
What links does Pusey have? Ascot Priory doesn't count now that Mother Cecilia has died!
Posted by sebby (# 15147) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Oferyas:
I saw one example recently: the international website of the Order of Preachers (Dominicans) highlights the steady increase in the number of vocations they are experiencing.
They do have an outstanding prior in their Cambridge house whom I beleive is in charge of the English novitiate. His tutor at Oxford for his DPhil was Rowan Williams.
Posted by (S)pike couchant (# 17199) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
What links does Pusey have? Ascot Priory doesn't count now that Mother Cecilia has died!
I must be out of date, as I was thinking of Ascot.
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
Alas Mother Cecilia died in 2004, as the last of her order, and Ascot Priory is run, primarily as a retreat house, by Canon Ursell.
http://www.ascotpriory.org.uk/Index.htm
Posted by TurquoiseTastic (# 8978) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
The days when monks and nuns were trotted out as exotic extras on the set of Anglo-Catholic Congresses are long gone, as is the suspicion of the religious life on the part of all but an equally loony protestant fringe. Taizé and Iona (admittedly not a religious community in the traditional sense) have seen to that. The main problem is a lack of awareness of Anglican religious among many laity and parishes. Parish priests and vocations advisers should do more to publicise them.
I agree about the lack of awareness. I think many - maybe most - Evangelical Anglicans are unaware than there is any such thing as an Anglican monk or nun. I certainly remember a curate at a large, by-no-means-extreme Evangelical church saying in his sermon:
"I was talking to a nun the other day - did you know, she was in the Church of England! I didn't know you could be in the Church of England and a nun, but there you go!"
Probe a bit deeper, and although there is little overt hostility, you will very often encounter considerable resistance to the whole idea of monastic life. Say one is having a Bible study and the question of "how can we really, just dedicate our whole lives to God" (good Evo question) comes up.
Try saying "Well, how about becoming a monk? Have you ever thought of that?"
Generally you will get an objection along the following lines - although nowadays, couched much more politely.
- "This is self-indulgent, really they ought to be out serving God in the world"
- "This is unnatural, people who want to do this must be weird"
- "This is a typical Catholic "salvation by works" thing, they think that by being more "religious" they are earning Brownie points with God" (The phrase "religious life" does not help here)
- "I went to a school run by monks/nuns and I had a really bad time, they were really unpleasant"
Now obviously it is possible to argue against all of these objections. But I do think that these inarticulated feelings are still floating around a lot. In conservative circles I think it's mainly residual, handed down from a more fiercely anti-Catholic past. In charismatic circles I think it's mainly because there are lots of new converts who retain the knee-jerk reactions that a non-Christian might have.
So for most Evos, monasticism is not even on the radar, and if it should ever float into view, these bogeys incline us to give a wide berth.
Angloid mentions Iona and Taize - but again I think they're far from universally known and somehow don't fall into the same mental "bracket" as mainstream monasticism. And perhaps some conservatives might regard Iona as suspciously liberal (after all, some conservatives regard Alpha as suspiciously liberal) and Taize as suspiciously Catholic.
Posted by (S)pike couchant (# 17199) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
Now obviously it is possible to argue against all of these objections. But I do think that these inarticulated feelings are still floating around a lot. In conservative circles I think it's mainly residual, handed down from a more fiercely anti-Catholic past.
Fiercely anti-Catholic past? In my experience, most Evangelical Anglicans are still pretty fiercely anti-Catholic. In my darker moments, I think it's pretty much the defining feature of their self-identification. An exaggerated hostility to the religious life, or rather to the idea of the religious life, is part and parcel of that. I seem to recall that when Fr Wagner built St Bart's, one of the sensationalist rumours that the Evangelicals spread around Brighton was that he was secretly hiding nuns in that big church of his. Attitudes have changed, but not by that much.
In fairness, a certain subspecies of Catholic (particularly in this country) seems to self-define as 'not Protestant'.
[ 13. July 2012, 16:40: Message edited by: (S)pike couchant ]
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
In a similar (though historic) way, I remember reading about the residents of Birmingham who, when they heard that Cardinal Newman's Oratorians would be living in cells, believed that they would be locked in with bars o the windows!
Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on
:
Ok
Taize and Iona are a small part of something much bigger. Lets me give you a number of examples
That list is in no way complete. I know of others and I am pretty sure I only know a minority of them. Most of these are dispersed communities, most follow a rule of life and most are ecumenical. They function a lot closer to a Third Order than they do to a full monastic order.
Jengie
Posted by Laurelin (# 17211) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
I agree about the lack of awareness. I think many - maybe most - Evangelical Anglicans are unaware than there is any such thing as an Anglican monk or nun. I certainly remember a curate at a large, by-no-means-extreme Evangelical church saying in his sermon:
"I was talking to a nun the other day - did you know, she was in the Church of England! I didn't know you could be in the Church of England and a nun, but there you go!"
Oh dear. Really?! You'd have thought an Anglican curate would have learned that there is a monastic tradition in the CoE during their training ...!
quote:
Originally posted by (S)pike couchant:
Fiercely anti-Catholic past? In my experience, most Evangelical Anglicans are still pretty fiercely anti-Catholic.
Some, perhaps. Certainly true of many conservative evangelicals. Not so true of open evangelicals.
The boot can be on the other foot. On my first ever visit to a RC Mass, one of the regular worshippers ribbed me very gently for being a Protestant (which was fine) and then told me very sweetly that it must be nice for me to attend a 'real' church (unlike, presumably, my crappy Protestant church!) Hmmmm.
quote:
In my darker moments, I think it's pretty much the defining feature of their self-identification.
Speaking pretty much as a 'cradle evangelical', I would question that. I am not denying the strong anti-Catholic strain in some quarters, but it doesn't define all evangelicals, and even a strong anti-Catholicism is not actually the 'most defining feature' of ultra-conservative evangelicals. (Although it might appear that way in a confrontational situation ...) There is a lot more to the evangelical tradition than just being against stuff.
I could no more be a nun than fly to the moon, and God would have to drag me kicking and screaming into any kind of Christian community, let alone a monastic one, but I have greatly appreciated staying in retreat centres run by religious communities, both RC and Anglican. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
What about those who function daily in community and are not dispersed?
Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on
:
Right to give a different arbitary picture on the diversity I have found a a listing of Intentional Communities which say they are Christian
Now all Anglican Religious Orders are Christian Intentional Communities by definition. What I am not sure of is whether all Christian Intentional Communities are religious orders. I tend to look for two things, the intentional living together and the rule. Intentional living together is the mark of these communities and the Rule is the mark of the earlier list, but to have the full charism I tend to feel you need both.
Jengie
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
Hmm, though that site doesn't list 'traditional' monastic communities...
Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on
:
I suspect because it lists communities that sign up with it, not those that don't.
Jengie
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
Ah I see.
I do wonder whether we will see the likes of Ascot repopulated in the future. It might be a complete fantasy, but I'm sure if a few young(ish) people began living a raditional community life they would find others to join them if they were given suitable 'advertising'.
Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on
:
Actually it is quite hard to draw the Monastic/Non-Monastic line within Protestantism, we have to deal with things like Fairfield Moravian Settlement, Quakers seem to have done something similar and then there are Deaconess de Reuilly in France which look like a full blown monastic order but belong to Diakonia which includes the Methodist Diaconal Order.
Nothing is ever simple.
Jengie
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Laurelin:
Originally posted by (S)pike couchant:
Fiercely anti-Catholic past? In my experience, most Evangelical Anglicans are still pretty fiercely anti-Catholic.
quote:
Some, perhaps. Certainly true of many conservative evangelicals. Not so true of open evangelicals.
Quite common among evangelical converts from Catholicism. Probably because they never experienced Catholicism as it is lived today, but absorbed some hell-fire theology at second-hand. But of the evangelicals that I know, most of them value their contacts with (Roman and Anglo-) Catholics and benefit from their insight. The same is true vice-versa.
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
I was once on an exchange with Wycliffe Hall (don't ask) and heard an ordinand from there argue that Anglican clergy who give Benediction should be arrested! Unfortunately it was only after I laughed that I realised that not only was he serious, but that the lecturer (the Vice Principal) agreed with him...
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
And according to the other thread, Wycliffe Hall is in even more dire straits than most Anglican convents.
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
Considering they go to church only three times a week whereas another (unnamed) Anglican theological college in Oxford does so three times each day, I'm not surprised.
(tongue very much in cheek)
Posted by sebby (# 15147) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
I do wonder whether we will see the likes of Ascot repopulated in the future. It might be a complete fantasy, but I'm sure if a few young(ish) people began living a raditional community life they would find others to join them if they were given suitable 'advertising'.
It is probably true that is helps when a few like-minded and like-aged join at the same time -although not all would stay the course. So much depends on WHO ELSE is there I imagine. And numbers breed numbers.
Part of the acceleration of decline in some monasteries and convents has possibly been the fact that due to the very advanced ages of many members, young novices have ended up as care workers.
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
Yes indeed, numbers breed numbers, and I suspect such a community would need at least six to begin with in order to survive. Even then, I wonder whether Canon or Friar type orders such as SSJE (that is, those active in the community) would be more succesful as they could be more easily accesible to parishes.
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
That's how most orders started in the C of E. Especially women's ones: they were doing practical work such as nursing, social work etc which helped them to become accepted. As they settled down several of them realised that they were drawn to a more contemplative way of life.
Conversely, I would suggest that the need today is for more contemplative communities. There are already plenty of people doing the practical stuff. Though as I type I realise that at least under the current government social care is going to depend more and more on volunteers which probably does mean active vocations too.
Posted by Garasu (# 17152) on
:
Originally posted by Boat Boy: quote:
Hmm, but can one really incorporate religious spirituality in one's own life? Yes, there's a roaring trade in prayer books based on the ideas of Francis or Benedict, but I'm not convinced that it's really possible to incorporate the charism if those orders (well, not the contemplative ones) into every-day life outside the cloister.
What sort of Christianity is it that can't be incorporated into one's own life?
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
One that takes the dedication of all day, every day.
Posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd) (# 12163) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd):
I suppose a T-shirt would have to say more than:
"I'm just a lay".
"... laity" doesn't quite crack it.
Perhaps:
"Being laity is a perfectly respectable vocation".
"The church needs laity. Just for the money".
Something like this perhaps?
Certainly a conversation starter.
Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on
:
The worst of Evangelicalism, the worst of religious orders and the worst of your "normal" church are much the same. They become inward looking and disconnected from the wider community. Such groups either implode (which is nasty) or fade out due to lack of resources.
There really should be no problem within Evangelicalism about living absolutely for God, there is that requirement on all within the tradition, they may not therefore understand why you need to be in a special community to do that.
Jengie
[ 14. July 2012, 08:36: Message edited by: Jengie Jon ]
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
Ah I see.
I do wonder whether we will see the likes of Ascot repopulated in the future. It might be a complete fantasy, but I'm sure if a few young(ish) people began living a raditional community life they would find others to join them if they were given suitable 'advertising'.
Are you saying you think somebody else ought to do that? Or is that what you want and feel called to do?
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
There really should be no problem within Evangelicalism about living absolutely for God, there is that requirement on all within the tradition, they may not therefore understand why you need to be in a special community to do that.
Jengie
It's a requirement on all Christians, not just evangelicals. I know that some medieval ideas suggested that Religious were living a more 'perfect' life, but nobody suggests that today. It's a different vocation, just as marriage is a different vocation.
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
Ah I see.
I do wonder whether we will see the likes of Ascot repopulated in the future. It might be a complete fantasy, but I'm sure if a few young(ish) people began living a raditional community life they would find others to join them if they were given suitable 'advertising'.
Are you saying you think somebody else ought to do that? Or is that what you want and feel called to do?
Ah, well now there's a question...
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
I am puzzled by the suggestions here that religious communities should advertise to get their numbers up. From my contacts with Mucknell I know that it takes a lot of work from the entire community to support someone as they try their vocation. If many more arrived they would be swamped! (Mucknell is healthy, but small.) It also seems to go against the spirit of the Rule, which has quite a bit to say making admission hard, almost putting people off, rather than wooing them through advertising.
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
Not necessarily advertising, as such, rather making sure that those considering vocation (of whatever kind) at least know of their existence.
Posted by venbede (# 16669) on
:
Malling Abbey has no priest among the nuns, so they have a priest for mass. When I was there, mass was lead by a woman priest.
Haggeston Priory has two women priests among its members, and CSJB at Begbroke had one in training when I was last in contact.
I'd have thought the major problem is that celibacy is not thought to be possible nowadays.
As a gay man, I'm totally grateful that for most of its history, the Christian church has not thought marriage is the only possibility and that living in committed same sex communities is equally valid.
Posted by venbede (# 16669) on
:
I made the last post in response to the comments about women priests without having read the subsequent page of posts.
Dom Gregory Dix's community now attends mass regularly at Salisbury Cathedral with a woman dean and women priests.
Posted by Garasu (# 17152) on
:
I said: quote:
What sort of Christianity is it that can't be incorporated into one's own life?
To which Boat Boy replied: quote:
One that takes the dedication of all day, every day.
Er... precisely? Isn't that what we're supposed to be doing?
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
Oh we can try, but I wouldn't presume to equate my spiritual life with that of, say, a Carthusian.
Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
Oh we can try, but I wouldn't presume to equate my spiritual life with that of, say, a Carthusian.
But it is supposed to be. That is one of the challenges of Protestantism, no more "let them professionals get on with it while we amateurs get by doing very little". We are all called as servants of God and we are all called to do our utmost to be good ones.
Jengie
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
Oh we can try, but I wouldn't presume to equate my spiritual life with that of, say, a Carthusian.
But it is supposed to be. That is one of the challenges of Protestantism, no more "let them professionals get on with it while we amateurs get by doing very little". We are all called as servants of God and we are all called to do our utmost to be good ones.
Jengie
But we don't, do we? 'The professionals' simply have more time to devote to the contemplation and praise of God.
Posted by TurquoiseTastic (# 8978) on
:
It's true that the monastic life enables one to serve God in a different way which would not be possible outside. But that does not mean that a non-monastic life is therefore second-best.
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
Oh absolutely, but we were specifically discussing the possibility of incorporating elements of monastic spirituality into everyday life in any meaningful way.
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
Which is of course why the Jesuits have had such influence on lay spirituality, because it is rigorous without being in the slightest degree monastic. Having said that, some people can quite successfully integrate large elements of monastic spirituality into their everyday lives.
Posted by Trisagion (# 5235) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by jlav12:
This is entirely a personal opinion but I think the English Reformation and especially the publication of the Prayer Book made religious orders superfluous. The Prayer Book sought to eliminate the distinction between religious and secular by providing a common Office that was intended for everyone. Added to that there wasn't an Anglican expression of monasticism for ~300 years (~1535-~1835), which contained the "classical" Anglican period.
Fascinating thread but do you really think this jlav12? Have you ever met any monks or nuns, or read any monastic autobiographies? The suggestion that Cranmer's prayer book did or could have made religious life superfluous is preposterous, almost ridiculous.
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
Quite; the BCP is a comparatively comprehensive book, but to that extent?
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Trisagion:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by jlav12:
[qb] Added to that there wasn't an Anglican expression of monasticism for ~300 years (~1535-~1835), which contained the "classical" Anglican period.
You forget Little Gidding. Admittedly not a traditional monastery since it included married and family members, but as far as its routine and prayer life went was comparable. And the reason religious orders reappeared in the C of E wasn't just down to medieval romanticism (though it played a part with some, notably Fr Ignatius) but a deeply felt need, clearly not satisfied with the normal round of parish worship.
Posted by Joan Rasch (# 49) on
:
BTW - NY Times has a nice little article on SSJE in Cambridge, MA
/Joan
Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on
:
In a sense I think it is highly important that the spirituality of lay people exceeds those of monastics. I want a banker who feels he accounts to God for how his actions affect the poor, I want a doctor who learns compassions from our Lord, I want a crafts person who seeks to do the best they can to glorify God, I want the checkout lad or lass to be ready to serve the Christ in customers, I want the researchers to be humble and seek truth, not being scared to make mistakes and admit it.
There are areas where I believe monastic orders have the edge over non-monastics but those do not easily equate to greater spirituality.
I also believe that living with a community under a rule can be an attractive way to live your life even if that life is very normal.There is something counter-cultural in that, and something that I think makes a space in society which isn't there at present However I am more drawn towards co-housing and intentional communities that traditional monastics in that.
Jengie
[ 15. July 2012, 08:26: Message edited by: Jengie Jon ]
Posted by Japes (# 5358) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
Oh we can try, but I wouldn't presume to equate my spiritual life with that of, say, a Carthusian.
But it is supposed to be. That is one of the challenges of Protestantism, no more "let them professionals get on with it while we amateurs get by doing very little". We are all called as servants of God and we are all called to do our utmost to be good ones.
Jengie
But we don't, do we? 'The professionals' simply have more time to devote to the contemplation and praise of God.
Hollow laugh here...
Frankly, I have more time for prayer, contemplation and the praise of God as a lay person, in full time employment than I ever did in 20 years living in a religious community.
Posted by Mama Thomas (# 10170) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Joan Rasch:
BTW - NY Times has a nice little article on SSJE in Cambridge, MA
/Joan
Thank you, Joan Rasch for the link.
I see work like what the SSJE are doing in Cambridge, Mass is increasingly necessary. There is still a great need for religious orders and the monastic life. And in TEC, very few people are willing to live the whole life. It seems there are several groups and lots of individuals who love dressing up in habits and calling themselves after a major religious order but who don't live in community or practice celibacy, both of which are of the essence of monasticism. People want the rewards of the monastic life without the sacrifices.
I do believe they will rise again though, in God's good time.
Posted by StevHep (# 17198) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
Oh we can try, but I wouldn't presume to equate my spiritual life with that of, say, a Carthusian.
Having spent time as a Carthusian novice I would suggest that you make a difficult generalisation. The Carthusian life makes it easier to spend ones time in silence, work and prayer but simply creating the form does not imbue it with content. I think that a Carthusian life well lived can help one attune more closely with the Holy Spirit than, say, a truckers life well lived. A Carthusian life badly lived, however is good for neither man nor God. To use a, perhaps unfortunate, analogy its a bit like smoking. The more you smoke the more chance you have of getting cardiac or pulmonary diseases. But you can still get them if you don't smoke and you can dodge them even if you do. So with the religious and the lay life.
Finally the crucial thing is God's plan for you. If He wants you to be married, raise children and drive a truck then you have no business going into the Religious life. The first word of the Rule of St Benedict is listen and that is the important thing. Listen for what God is calling you to do (vocation), hear Him then, and only then, obey Him.
Posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd) (# 12163) on
:
I think monastic communities attract people if they have a legitimate, living charism. A real spiritual core always does that. If the core is lost the community folds.
A few hours ago I heard an 80 year old Carmelite preach a sermon at the 75th anniversary of a church in Brisbane. I suspect that church and priory will continue as will the order. The personnel will change but not the raison d'etre.
Likewise, I don't see the monasteries on Mt Athos, which have been there for 1000 years, dying. The ethos is alive.
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
StevHep, thank you for that great analogy.
Posted by StevHep (# 17198) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Are you saying you think somebody else ought to do that? Or is that what you want and feel called to do?
Ah, well now there's a question...
I am minded of this passage in 1 Kings 8 (RSV)
17 Now it was in the heart of David my father to build a house for the name of the LORD, the God of Israel.
18 But the LORD said to David my father, 'Whereas it was in your heart to build a house for my name, you did well that it was in your heart;
19 nevertheless you shall not build the house, but your son who shall be born to you shall build the house for my name.'
God may be pleased that we desire to do a special thing in His service but may nonetheless have other plans for us. 19 Do not quench the Spirit, 20 do not despise prophesying, 21 but test everything; hold fast what is good 1 Thessalonians 5 (RSV)
Posted by Invictus_88 (# 15352) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd):
I think monastic communities attract people if they have a legitimate, living charism. A real spiritual core always does that. If the core is lost the community folds.
A few hours ago I heard an 80 year old Carmelite preach a sermon at the 75th anniversary of a church in Brisbane. I suspect that church and priory will continue as will the order. The personnel will change but not the raison d'etre.
Likewise, I don't see the monasteries on Mt Athos, which have been there for 1000 years, dying. The ethos is alive.
That living spirit is certainly what animates a religious order, inspires them in their devotion, and shines with sufficient light that people can explore them in discerning their vocations.
It might also be part of the success of traditional communities. In keeping alive their deep roots in the Church and in the spirituality of their founders, they maintain an enduring shine and inspire continued vocations, in contrast with those whose roots withered and were instead tilted by the winds of popular culture.
Posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd) (# 12163) on
:
I think many people are looking for a deep spirituality which has passed the test of time and resonates within them, Invictus_88.
Sometimes people get an inspired glimpse, as the late Thomas Merton did and then spend their lives attempting to regain it. The glimpse often comes and goes, as his life shows.
I think, at the end, someone who has really lived the life would "know" in a way which might be difficult for outsiders to comprehend.
Posted by lilyswinburne (# 12934) on
:
As a lay person who has stayed at the SSJE house in Cambridge (before it went up to $100 a night), I would like to point out that their lifestyle is much more comfortable than mine in many areas:
- Lavish non-vegetarian meals
- Fantastic location
- Opportunities for study
- Fine library
- Warm community
- Respect almost tantamout to adulation
- No financial worries
I believe it is the contrast in life styles between lay and clerical (including monastic) that contributed to the Protestant Reformation.
I myself was rather starry-eyed about religious orders until I:
1. visited several
2. heard the news of all the scandals (sexual and otherwise) and coverups
Lily
Posted by lilyswinburne (# 12934) on
:
Sorry I forgot to mention that the SSJE also has a paid cook (something I would love to have!).
Lily
Posted by (S)pike couchant (# 17199) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilyswinburne:
- Lavish non-vegetarian meals
- Fantastic location
- Opportunities for study
- Fine library
- Warm community
And none of that is in any way incompatible with the vows that the brothers take. Being a monk is about serving God in a certain way as defined by a rule of life. In modern times, this has not usually involved a vow to be miserable all the time.
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
Indeed - there's nothing to say that monks should deliberately make themselves uncomfortable or, in this age of readily available meat, vegetarian.
Similar accusations are sometimes levelled at the Benedictines of the English Congregation, probably, I suspect, largely because they run public (private, to Americans) schools, but they are holy men living out their vocations in great devotion to God. Yes their food is cooked for them (by the school kitchens I believe) and they have a beautiful houses, but they could not be accused of 'luxury'.
Posted by lilyswinburne (# 12934) on
:
The Cambridge house of the SSJE has not been immune to scandal.
I personally have not found much worth emulating or admiring in the middle-class lifestyle of modern religious orders, and agree with JengieJon that lay spiritually should surpass monastic spirituality.
Lily
Posted by (S)pike couchant (# 17199) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilyswinburne:
The Cambridge house of the SSJE has not been immune to scandal.
I personally have not found much worth emulating or admiring in the middle-class lifestyle of modern religious orders, and agree with JengieJon that lay spiritually should surpass monastic spirituality.
Then the only advice I can have for you — since you find Western monasticism since the time of Benedict so unappealing — is get thee to the Egyptian desert or else follow the Rule of Saint Columbanus. It will be a lonely life, but it sounds as if that's the way that you would prefer it, given your deprecation of the decadent western monasticism.
The above is obviously meant largely is jest, but if you really do feel a vocation to the austerity of the ascetic life, then I wish you all the best and may God and his Blessed Mother be with you. Even so, I don't think it's particularly Christian to deprecate the vocations of others.
Posted by lilyswinburne (# 12934) on
:
I believe the topic for discussion was "The Loss of the Religious Life". What I am pointing out is that, from my research and experience, "Religious Life" in modern times is in many ways more comfortable, and often morally more questionable (in terms of the aforementioned scandals and coverups) than lay life.
This may explain the lack of vocations to "Religious Life". As more information is available about it through the Internet, etc., interest lessens.
The same applies to the decline of the Church of England, and, indeed, of Western Christianity. As more information is available now than in the past, interest lessens.
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
Lily, I do think it's a little uncharitable to imply that all religious are some kind of pampered perverts, living luxurious lives of moral outrage.
Posted by lilyswinburne (# 12934) on
:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cartoon/2011/oct/28/steve-bell-st-pauls-rowan-williams-cartoon
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilyswinburne:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cartoon/2011/oct/28/steve-bell-st-pauls-rowan-williams-cartoon
What's that got to do with anything?
Posted by (S)pike couchant (# 17199) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
quote:
Originally posted by lilyswinburne:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cartoon/2011/oct/28/steve-bell-st-pauls-rowan-williams-cartoon
What's that got to do with anything?
Virtually nothing outwith lily's fertile imagination, as far as I can tell
Posted by leo (# 1458) on
:
I don't think the religious life is declining, merely changing. Some Fresh Expressions communities have a rule of life and regard themselves as part of the 'new monasticism.' Lots of people are tertiaries of traditional communities.
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
Much as I am a fan of Steve Bell, his anticlericalism occasionally gets the better of him, and I don't recall +Rowan leading the pro-capitalist forces against Occupy. More the reverse I would have thought. (Though maybe the bearded prelate is supposed to be the Bishop of London, which would make more sense, though still unfair.)
But nowt to do with the Religious life. Some people undoubtedly have a vocation to live with the poor and share the same conditions as the poor; but that's not the essence of being a monk or nun. It is about stability (one of the Benedictine vows); staying faithful to the same place and community and learning to listen to the voice of God. You can't do that if you are distracted by an empty stomach or wondering how to replace your threadbare habit, any more than if you are distracted by over-indulgence and 'worldly temptations'.
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
Hear hear
Posted by TurquoiseTastic (# 8978) on
:
While I would tend to agree with Angloid and Boat Boy on this, it does raise the question:
Why then was it that in previous ages the privation of the body was often seen as an aid to holiness? As far as I can see there have always been comfortable, wealthy orders but there have also been those that lived a very hard life, and saw this as an essential part of their Rule.
Why? But maybe that is another thread.
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
Different vocations for different people - some seek God through asceticism and some through contemplation (some, of course, through both).
Posted by Pancho (# 13533) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
Please give the source of your claim that Roman Catholic religious communities are seeing increases in membership.
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
Enough for you?
Of course not. You wouldn't take the fact that your neighbor had a baby this year as proof that the world's population is increasing.
--Tom Clune
Let me help.
Just last year the National Catholic Register had a story on the quiet revival among male orders. While overall numbers of male religious are down, new communities are being founded and attracting new vocations: [link].
quote:
Wick sees all of these communities as unique expressions of the Holy Spirit in the Church. “There are so many different charisms,” he said. “We have the older, more established orders, newer communities in the tradition of an older order, and then altogether new orders. There’s something for everyone, but a common thread among the communities doing well is their faithfulness to the magisterium.”
While overall numbers are down, there is a surprising, quiet revival of religious men in the United States, and Abbot Anderson believes “if these young people continue to pray, they will rebuild religious life in America.”
The BBC had a similar report about a growing number of female vocations in the UK among the young last October:[link].
As long ago as 2009 the New York Times already reported on the rise in vocations among traditional orders: New Nuns and Priests Seen Opting for Tradition .
quote:
A new study of Roman Catholic nuns and priests in the United States shows that an aging, predominantly white generation is being succeeded by a smaller group of more racially and ethnically diverse recruits who are attracted to the religious orders that practice traditional prayer rituals and wear habits.
Even before the NY Times story the growth among traditional had been talked about on Catholic sites. If people need more convincing I have more links to share.
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
Thank you Pancho.
Posted by aumbry (# 436) on
:
The benedictine monastery at Notre Dame de Bellaigue in France had so many vocations that they have opened another Abbey at Monschau in Germany. Traditionalist monks are definitely on the increase. See here
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
As have the monks at Barroux. They started in a little ancient church with a couple of monks, then grew so large that they built a whole new abbey in romanesque style on another site and have now founded another priory elsewhere.
Posted by que sais-je (# 17185) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by (S)pike couchant:
... Betjeman [wrote] a wonderful gem of a poem on this subject
Perhaps too obvious to mention on such a well read site, but the first stanza is presumably a conscious echo of Dover Beach. If so the ending neatly conterpoints the nun's conviction with a wider Victorian loss of faith in the earlier poem.
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
Yes - do you think Arnold was worried about the loss of faith? I've always understood it as an acknowledgement of the darkness and confusion possible if someone's faith disappears, coupled with his own conviction and confidence in his position in the world.
Posted by venbede (# 16669) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by que sais-je:
quote:
Originally posted by (S)pike couchant:
... Betjeman [wrote] a wonderful gem of a poem on this subject
Perhaps too obvious to mention on such a well read site, but the first stanza is presumably a conscious echo of Dover Beach. If so the ending neatly conterpoints the nun's conviction with a wider Victorian loss of faith in the earlier poem.
I'd never thought of that. I'll go and compare them. Thank you.
Posted by que sais-je (# 17185) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
Yes - do you think Arnold was worried about the loss of faith? I've always understood it as an acknowledgement of the darkness and confusion possible if someone's faith disappears, coupled with his own conviction and confidence in his position in the world.
A good point. Though the last stanza has always sounded to me like someone hoping that commitment to a lover might give them some precarious security when faith seems to fail. He calls his lover, "Come to the window, sweet is the night-air!" in the first verse and I assume that the last stanza "Ah, love, let us be true/To one another!" is addressed to the lover.
However this is a diversion from the subject of the thread. My apologies to all. To get back roughly in the right direction by a tortuous link: Dover Beach is the poem Montag the Fireman reads out loud in Fahrenheit 451. What forced him out of the closet was a woman who chose to burn with her books. Her last words are: "Play the man, Master Ridley; we shall this day light such a candle ..." and we're back with Anglicanism/Catholicism and such.
Posted by Birdseye (# 5280) on
:
Boat Boy, Firstly, I don't think Traditional Anglican monastic orders are entirely in decline -the Community of the Resurrection in Mirfield has had several new professions in recent years, all men in their early thirties and forties...
They don't exactly advertise
I think it's true that an order needs to have a vibrant and charismatic spiritual life in order to thrive, but also there is a limit to how many monks you can sensibly have on one site -and they reckon 25ish is the limit and they have 22 right now.
And secondly... have you considered that your early concern for this area of the church's life might indicate a possible vocation?
Why not explore it further - you'd be surprised how active some communities are.
NB: you'd enjoy the incense at Mirfield -but if you want a bit of the best Rosa Mystica you'll have to coincide with a feast of the BVM
[ 19. July 2012, 19:49: Message edited by: Birdseye ]
Posted by sebby (# 15147) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
Yes - do you think Arnold was worried about the loss of faith? I've always understood it as an acknowledgement of the darkness and confusion possible if someone's faith disappears, coupled with his own conviction and confidence in his position in the world.
To begin with, perhaps. He would have been very conscious of the legacy of his (at the time) more famous father Dr Thomas Arnold of Rugby and Regius Professor of History - a post he held whilst Headmaster of Rugby. HIs sermons were widely read in Victorian England, and many, not least, Stanley Dean of Westminster almost canonised him.
He was the total opposite of Newman. Both men submitted for their Oxford BDs together and stood in the Senior Common Room at Oriel together in total silence.
Latterly, one might assume that the younger Arnold accepted the doubt as inevitable. That is more the theme of the poem, perhaps.
Posted by Boat Boy (# 13050) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by sebby:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
Yes - do you think Arnold was worried about the loss of faith? I've always understood it as an acknowledgement of the darkness and confusion possible if someone's faith disappears, coupled with his own conviction and confidence in his position in the world.
To begin with, perhaps. He would have been very conscious of the legacy of his (at the time) more famous father Dr Thomas Arnold of Rugby and Regius Professor of History - a post he held whilst Headmaster of Rugby. HIs sermons were widely read in Victorian England, and many, not least, Stanley Dean of Westminster almost canonised him.
He was the total opposite of Newman. Both men submitted for their Oxford BDs together and stood in the Senior Common Room at Oriel together in total silence.
Latterly, one might assume that the younger Arnold accepted the doubt as inevitable. That is more the theme of the poem, perhaps.
Yes, Thomas Arnold's 'muscular christianity' would have been in the minority in the Oriel Common Room of the 1840s, indeed I suspect that he would have looked for a Fellowship elsewhere were the Regius Professorship not tied to that particular college. However, I'm not quite sure how Thomas' collegiate disagreements would have influenced the theological opiniosn of his son twenty years later...
Posted by lilyswinburne (# 12934) on
:
On this topic, has anyone else read "An Unquenchable Thirst" by Mary Johnson? She was a Missionary of Charity for 20 years, then left, and has written a memoir of her time in the order.
I am almost finished with the book, and find it fascinating.
It will not do much for the cause of reviving interest in the religious life.
Posted by venbede (# 16669) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilyswinburne:
It will not do much for the cause of reviving interest in the religious life.
Quite likely. Madame Bovary is unlikely to lead to interest in pursuing marriage.
Posted by sebby (# 15147) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
quote:
Originally posted by sebby:
quote:
Originally posted by Boat Boy:
Yes - do you think Arnold was worried about the loss of faith? I've always understood it as an acknowledgement of the darkness and confusion possible if someone's faith disappears, coupled with his own conviction and confidence in his position in the world.
To begin with, perhaps. He would have been very conscious of the legacy of his (at the time) more famous father Dr Thomas Arnold of Rugby and Regius Professor of History - a post he held whilst Headmaster of Rugby. HIs sermons were widely read in Victorian England, and many, not least, Stanley Dean of Westminster almost canonised him.
He was the total opposite of Newman. Both men submitted for their Oxford BDs together and stood in the Senior Common Room at Oriel together in total silence.
Latterly, one might assume that the younger Arnold accepted the doubt as inevitable. That is more the theme of the poem, perhaps.
Yes, Thomas Arnold's 'muscular christianity' would have been in the minority in the Oriel Common Room of the 1840s, indeed I suspect that he would have looked for a Fellowship elsewhere were the Regius Professorship not tied to that particular college. However, I'm not quite sure how Thomas' collegiate disagreements would have influenced the theological opiniosn of his son twenty years later...
In the sense that we are all creatures of our time, genes and upbringing. Thomas Arnold was almost a household name at a time when his son was not. Dr Arnold was the 'great man' in Victorian England until a little debunked by Lytton Strachey, and somewhat revived again later. This is not a great example, but a little like the Martin Amis's writing which is heavily laced with dealing with his father Kingsley's long shadow.
Posted by Sir Pellinore (# 12163) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Birdseye:
Boat Boy, ...
And secondly... have you considered that your early concern for this area of the church's life might indicate a possible vocation?
Why not explore it further - you'd be surprised how active some communities are.
Well, there you are Boat Boy.
He even put in a plug for Mirfield.
Once inside you would be a real expert on the subject.
![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
In a pomo world the Religious Life is vastly more than the monastic, no matter how attractive that is.
Posted by sebby (# 15147) on
:
I wonder if there is a case for an Anglican oratory in the CofE along the lines of St Philip Neri's, but residentary not like OGS. Perhaps a resident community of secular priests, independent yet living in community. It could be all male, female, or mixed, but each priest single of course. Novices would be called to that particular charism and ordained specifically as members of the oratory - like the RC model. In these days of a variety of ministeries - including LOMs - this should not be a problem. I understand that this was under discussion over thirty years ago and that the staff of ACS were at that time a driving force, although it never happened.
I am not necessarily suggesting similar architecture to Brompton.
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by sebby:
I am not necessarily suggesting similar architecture to Brompton.
Phew! You had me worried for a moment. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
Posted by sebby (# 15147) on
:
But now I think of it, what fun that would be!
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
The Mirfield Fathers nearly ended up with something like a cross between Brompton Oratory and Westminster Cathedral. Thank God for the Depression!
Posted by Sir Pellinore (# 12163) on
:
Are Mirfield's premises the ultimate Anglican monastic erection? ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
Posted by sebby (# 15147) on
:
Or perhaps something like Oxford Fellows living in a huge house combining their salaries so they could be waited on and have good food, seperate studies and bedrooms, but communal dining and a chapel.
The 'celibate' 19thC Fellows must have lived just a little like that.
I'm getting carried away with enthusiasm.
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
There was quite a lot of that atmosphere (at least, I guess, never having lived in an Oxford college) about CR until quite recently. Balanced by quite a lot of common-sense Anglican theology and genuine asceticism.
Posted by Laurence (# 9135) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
The Mirfield Fathers nearly ended up with something like a cross between Brompton Oratory and Westminster Cathedral. Thank God for the Depression!
You mean:
Original plans for Community of the Resurrection Church
It must be admitted, the final version is still rather beautiful in a late Roman/early Carolingian way, although lacking the dome!
A good aerial shot of the College and Community buildings
And the acoustics inside are very special. Sometimes the building sings along with you...
© Ship of Fools 2016
UBB.classicTM
6.5.0