Contrast The Man Who Would Make A Good Priest With The Man Who Would M

[bardegaulois]

I noted about a week ago that I had received a response from a society of secular priests to my inquiry regarding starting priestly formation. They stated that I had missed their age mark by a few years, but am welcome to consider entering as a "clerical oblate," which appears to be like a coadjutor brother. As I'm a little unsure as to what this entails, I figure it wouldn't hurt to write them again to find out more information.

Nonetheless, I won't really have enough information until I hear back from them, and so I am preparing letters to several other institutes regarding the priesthood. Considering that I'm very traditionally inclined and thus feel very strongly about pursuing the priesthood through a more traditional institute, however, my options are somewhat limited. As I'm in my 30s, my options are becoming more limited.

So after meditating on this for a while, I'm thinking it might be a good idea to remain open to the vocation of a brother. There's one big issue in all of this, though: in all of my thought about the consecrated life in the past, I had always been thinking more of the calling as a consecrated priest, and had always been drawn more to those institutes that were more clerical. To be frank, I don't know if I've ever met a brother who is not also a priest or a seminarian, not even at the Benedictine abbey where I retreat. Brothers seem somewhat rare nowadays.

 

So let me get your opinions: how would you contrast the type of man who would make a good priest with the type of man who would make a good brother? What are desirable qualities, characteristics, and personality traits in a brother that are NOT desirable qualities, characteristics, and personality traits in a priest? Conversely, what are desirable qualities, characteristics, and personality traits in a priest that are NOT desirable qualities, characteristics, and personality traits in a brother? In short, what are the determinative factors between these two types of men? It's a blunt question to which I doubt that there is a universally correct answer, but it's surely grist for thought. As much of my thinking results from my bouncing ideas off of others and then seeing how I react to their responses, I'd be happy to have any opinions.

Now, in the above, I understand that the differences between consecrated men in the same institute or type of institute, whether clerics or not, would likely be more modest than the differences between consecrated men in different types of institutes, e.g., a missionary brother would likely be more similar to a missionary priest than he would to a Trappist monk. But I think it best to leave these categories aside. So let's presume that that we're drawing our contrast between a priest and a brother in the same institute.

The society that I'm looking at is very devoted to the traditional liturgy and accordingly is mostly a society of priests who serve parishes. The letter I received from their vice-provincial states that the role of an oblate is "service of the Liturgy at the altar and in the Divine Office, basic studies in Latin and Chant, as well as... the necessary work of the apostolate such as teaching catechism, caring for the sacristy and priory, office administration, etc."

This in mind, I'm going to change tone a little. We've all read of Christ's visit to the house of Mary and Martha and of their two contrasting personalities. The one has always been seen as a symbol of the contemplative life, the other as a symbol of the active life. Certainly, when reading this, we all want to be more like Mary than like Martha. Whenever I meditate on this scene, I always find myself thinking of Velázquez's great canvas on the subject (here, if you don't know what I'm talking about: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/38/Christ_in_the_house_of_Marthe_and_Marry_V%C3%A9lazquez.jpg). Like any masterpiece of art, this can be read on a number of different levels. The biblical figures are relegated to the background; whether through a window, reflected in a mirror, or in a painting within a painting, we don't know. Our attention is drawn to the distraught young cook and the elderly servant whispering in her ear. Her eye catches ours, and we see ourselves now in her; we are the cook here. But is she looking at the scene with Christ and the two sisters, reflected in the mirror, longing for a more contemplative life, with the elderly woman counseling her to accept her place in life and resume her laborious work? Or is she frustrated to tears with the drudgery of her work, and thus her elder gestures to the painting on the wall, reminding her to think about the Lord?

I don't have an answer to this except to say that both readings are possible. Whatever is supposedly going through that young woman's mind has gone through mine a lot, and I'm sure it shall continually throughout my life, no matter where I find myself. It touches a universal chord. Life after the Fall is laborious by its very nature, yet we are called to be thoughtful. I've ordered my secular life deliberately that I might have a lot of opportunity to be alone, think, read, write, pray, and so forth. I've left better-paying jobs in order to be better able to do that--and to share the fruits of that as a teacher and tutor.

When I am active, thus, it tends to be in sharing the fruits of my contemplation. Without contemplation, it's just mere busy-ness to me. So many priests I know are, unfortunately, merely busy. I've had parish priests tell me that they rarely have a chance to meditate or to read, and end up ad-libbing their homilies. I've also seen eager young priests turn into jaded functionaries over time, to the spiritual detriment of those over whose souls they have cure. Aside from liturgical considerations, that's one of the reasons that I considered that working with an institute or society would be more appropriate; working with other priests would allow the work to be shared and thus allow more time for the intellectual and spiritual development that must animate their apostolate.

I know that I need more information from this society to answer this question appropriately, but where would the oblate or brother fit into this? Free from the obligations of administrating the sacraments, does he then have the opportunity, perhaps even more opportunity than the priests, to sit at the feet of Our Lord and to learn from Him, like Mary, in order better to be a blessing to those he instructs, those he befriends, those who come to him for counsel? Or is his life one of humdrum labour and worry about temporal things, like Martha, in order that only the priests might have that opportunity?

As I truly feel a strong draw to this institute's objective, those last questions are important as to whether I should continue to consider it or not. As I noted, I'm writing them asking for more information, but I'm also writing at the same time to other similar institutions that might offer the priesthood. I'm open, though, to whichever direction the Lord might lead me.

Anyhow, as always, your comments are greatly appreciated. The responses that you give to my questions do much more good than perhaps you realize. Thank you to all who care.

[inperpetuity]

Ok, not that I am even qualified to speak about this, but I'll just tell you what I'm thinking anyway.  It's probably more important what God wants you to do in the here and now.  I think it has to do with responding to grace, walking through the open door at least to see what's there, so you can embrace it or close the door .  It could be that if you do decide to embrace the clerical oblate vocation, they will see that you have a priestly vocation and let you know one day:  pack your things, your going to the seminary tomorrow.  I tried to do the Martha thing, but found I couldn't bring myself to embrace it and that I must follow the call I perceive to the contemplative monastic vocation.  I tried though because I knew there have been saints who wanted to be contemplative but became saints as active religious. :)

[Lumiere]

I have read quite a bit abut Dominican coopertor brothers. These links might help you clarify the issue:

 

Order of Preachers Vocations

 

The Dominican Cooperator Brother

 

Video from the Summit Dominicans' Blog

 

And the Blog written by a Dominican Cooperator Brother that got me interested in this topic in the first place.

[marigold]

The internet's just gone and deleted the entire long thing I was busy writing... grr!

[marigold]

Ignoring your questions about characteristics as I think they're a red herring! Just putting different thoughts down here...

 

Our diocesan panel for choosing seminarians asks candidates, 'Why is being a priest the only way you can serve the Church?'

 

I get the impression being a clerical oblate would feel like a step down for you. And maybe being a brother too. Both of those things are full and positive callings in themselves (using that in the broad sense of interest + eligibility + acceptance by Church body).

 

I understand being dissatisfied and feeling like you are not doing what you are meant to be doing. Believe me! And like me, you know you are capable and would be an asset to most places you might end up going. But I fell into thinking 'Where is good enough for me?' instead of 'Where can I work out my salvation in fear and trembling?'

 

One thing I've begun to understand recently is that some things are disordered desires that God lets play out, and some things are wonderful, right-ordered desires that he lets go and doesn't fulfil.

[Benedictus]

I wouldn't necessarily say there's an ideal type of person per se for either, or indeed, both callings.  I'd say Grace is the key thing in any calling. - God calls different types of people to do various things (and often the same things also). There are priests and brothers with different personality and temperament traits working alongside each other. I used to think God would call introverted men to contemplative life and extroverts to active orders, or similar. But it doesn't work out like that, and the diversity and surprises are interesting.

One of the biggest aids I found in working out my vocation has been speaking to people who felt called to different states of life: religious sisters, brothers, secular priests, priest brothers etc. Most religious brothers I spoke with felt a calling to use their skills and interests for the service of their institutes, but not as priests. They felt a calling to live in fraternity, with a specific way of life and charism, but not as a priest. They would rather focus on contemplation, parish visiting, lay missionary work, voluntary work, or training as psychologists, administrators, social workers, or nurses so they can develop their apostolic work in these fields to advance the work of their institute (and the church).

I have felt a calling to be a priest brother - I don't think I'd be fulfilled without either.  I feel called to community, especially a monastic one. My sense of calling to the priesthood has specific elements and attractions, notably the sacraments.  I come to this, in part, through my work - I could help others but there was lacking a sacramental element to what I'd do.  I feel called to be and do more, from a spiritual perspective.  That's how I perceive it anyway. I guess it's dfiferent for each of us.

[saintalis]

Bardegaulois,

 

Let me first say, you have outstanding grammar!! :)  Are you English? (British I mean)?  You don't have to answer that if you don't wish to... :)

 

I think an oblate/brother would definitely have more contemplative time, certainly more than a priest.  From what you describe of your life now (ordering it to allow more time for prayer and contemplation), I think you might be a good fit as a brother/oblate.  

 

The Holy Father told seminarians today not to become "functionaries" or "bureaucrats".  

 

 http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1401528.htm

 

 

[Benedictus]

Bardegaulois,

 

Let me first say, you have outstanding grammar!! :)  Are you English? (British I mean)?  You don't have to answer that if you don't wish to... :)

Many Brits have terrible grammar, and worse punctuation. I should know :lol: Maybe Bardegaulois is an exception, or a teacher. That would be my guess :bobby:

[petitpèlerin]

A friend of mine is a religious brother and he's expressed to me his gratefulness for his vocation, saying that if he had entered the diocesan priesthood he would most likely be functioning as an administrator rather than having the close relationships he has (with his brothers, and sisters, and the lay communities they serve) and the way their life is deeply rooted in liturgy and silent prayer. Many brothers of his community are called to the priesthood some time after their final profession, but it's not guaranteed for all of them. It sounds like, for you, whatever you do, you know you need to be deeply rooted in prayer, you have to find a way of life that will let you live that out.

 

Ok, not that I am even qualified to speak about this, but I'll just tell you what I'm thinking anyway.  It's probably more important what God wants you to do in the here and now.  I think it has to do with responding to grace, walking through the open door at least to see what's there, so you can embrace it or close the door .  It could be that if you do decide to embrace the clerical oblate vocation, they will see that you have a priestly vocation and let you know one day:  pack your things, your going to the seminary tomorrow.  I tried to do the Martha thing, but found I couldn't bring myself to embrace it and that I must follow the call I perceive to the contemplative monastic vocation.  I tried though because I knew there have been saints who wanted to be contemplative but became saints as active religious. :)

 

Oh my gosh. I had the same experience. I entered an active-contemplative community believing that it was an ideal balance of both and would challenge me to grow and give back what I've received, but when I lived the life I just knew in a short amount of time that this just wasn't the life I'm called to live, I need way more time in silence and solitude than that, and what do all these people expect from me all day anyway?! Don't they know I need to be alone?! That need to be alone, I believe, is a contemplative vocation. It was not something I could have ever known unless I went and did it and I'm so glad I did. I completely agree with your recommendation to just go and do it and find out.

[reminiscere]

Here's more information on the clerical oblates for you: http://www.institute-christ-king.org/vocations/oblates

 

May I suggest you try the Canons Regular of the New Jerusalem? They might take you.

[bardegaulois]

Thanks to all. Let me respond to a few of you individually.

 

Marigold, you're right to think that upon first reading the letter, I was disappointed. Not knowing what was involved, I did presume it to be a step down, a sort of consolation prize. Frankly, it was something I never considered before. Five or ten years ago, I'd likely have thrown the letter away, presuming they were looking for a glorified sexton or some other function for which I am rather inept, and not thought of it again. After my meditation that evening, however, I thought it might be prudent to get the necessary information so I might make an informed choice. It could be exactly where I am supposed to be, or I could eventually see it is something inappropriate. I know I've never left that general state of peace in which I've been finding myself since the year began.

 

But of course, that's not going to come from their recruiting posters, so kindly spare me the web links. It's going to come, as Benedictus suggested, from actually speaking to the persons involved. One of my requests in my letter to the vice-provincial is that I might have the address of an oblate in order to send a frank and candid letter to him, and hopefully have a discourse about his style of life. As I noted, I often come to deeper decisions not such much based on what others say, but rather how I respond to it.

 

But let me explore this statement "style of life" for a moment. That truly takes priority over what we do in the world does it not? This society is filled with utilitarian thinking and it can affect even those of us who strive quite strongly to be free of it. All too often, do we focus too greatly on what we do or what we want to do rather than looking at everything around us and asking if it is congruous with our unique way of being? And if it's not, then do we seek to remove ourselves into an estate more appropriate to that way of being, a new style of life, so to speak? In any case, I'll finish this thought later.

[bardegaulois]

Now that I've returned for the evening (no fancy i-gadgets here)...

 

I've really been starting to see lately that this way of being precedes any sort of social functionalism or any of that sort. Indeed, what one does derives from who one is, not the other way around. My spiritual director put it very wisely in the form of a question to me a couple months ago: do you live to work, or do you work to live? Being the artist and intellectual type, I'm well aware that I'm not a very useful man according to a certain point of view, even though I've been pleased to expend myself for a few years as a teacher of English. Excellent guess, those of you who made it! There was a great opportunity to take the results of my study and my observation of human nature and put them into good use. Yet something deeper was wanting. Even though I enjoy my work, I found that I did not live to work.

 

And so, after passing the end of last year in a somewhat neurotic dilemma, I put myself under spiritual direction, made a general confession of my whole life, and resolved to hew very strongly to keep within the state of grace. Over the course of but a few months, my doubts and frustrations were dispelled, a general sense of peace came over me, and the quiet but steady allure of the clerical life began to entice me again. As I could make no intellectual objection, I acquiesced to it. I trust that such is nothing other than an understated and modest action of the Holy Spirit. I am also of the mind that a potential change of the institute I consider or the course I take could be quite the same thing. When I am better informed, I shall then see if the intellect gives permission to the will on this. As I know, it could be that one place is more conducive to my destined state of being than another, and it might be that I'd never given much thought to it in the past. Moreover, I trust that the appropriate functions and actions derive from this state of being properly expressed.

 

Maintain the state of grace, be informed, and meditate often. I don't think I can express it much simpler than that. If I am to be an oblate in this institute, I will find myself attracted the the institute and the life, able to carry out the necessary duties of the life, and accepted by the institute. If I am to be a priest in another institute, I will find myself attracted to the institute and the life, able to carry out the necessary duties of the life, and accepted by the institute. My own will and intellect (based on my careful heeding of that Socratic dictum, know thyself) in cooperation with divine Grace intersect with the will of the Church. It troubles me that many seek to complicate this needlessly. If God has a directive will in this that contradicts my conclusions, then I trust He will find some way of making it known, and that I will be able to understand it and thus modify my course.

 

In any case, let me know if you have any further insights.

[reminiscere]

Here, I'll help you. Write to Abbé Barga in St. Louis, Abbé Brown in Chicago or Abbé Bennell in Rockford.