Role Of Lay Religious

[1054]

Wasn't sure where to ask this, but does anyone have a good source for information on the role of lay monks / nuns in the Catholic Church?  

Specifically what their role within the community is (in contrast to the monastics') and the variations that might occur amongst orders.  Do some orders put greater emphasis on that particular role than others?

Being in ignorance I'd appreciate anyone's advice of where to find credible information.  Thanks!

[Sponsa-Christi]

This is a great question, but I think it might be good if you could narrow it down or clarify it just a bit more.

 

I.e., what exactly do you mean by "lay religious"? Do you mean members of religious communities who aren't also ordained priests or deacons (which is the technical sense of the term)? 

 

Or were you thinking more like non-monastic forms of religious life? Or forms of consecrated life that aren't "religious" properly so-called, like societies of apostolic life? Or forms of consecrated life like secular institutes, where members live lives that are outwardly indistinguishable from ordinary lay people? Or maybe you had something like new lay movements in mind, where some members commit to living a more radical evangelical life without being consecrated "officially"?

 

But in any case, I'm sure there are plenty of people here who can be helpful. 

[maximillion]

The days when those in religious life were separated into lay and monastic are long gone..........

 

In an enclosed order they are all monastics ( except maybe for the externs ).

 

The separation was an ancient one dating back to the times when the nobility went into RL along with their servants, later this was a separation between the more well educated ( basically, those who could read ) and the others. Traditionally, lay religious members tended to have a more physical role, leaving contemplation/study/chant to the others.

[Nunsuch]

The status of "lay sister" was actually abolished by the Second Vatican Council in Perfectae Caritatis.  

"Unless conditions really suggest something else, care should be taken that there be only one class of Sisters in communities of women. Only that distinction of persons should be retained which corresponds to-the diversity of works for which the Sisters are destined, either by special vocation from God or by reason of special aptitude." (Perfectae caritatis, #15)

[OnlySunshine]

St. Martin de Porres was a lay brother in his Dominican friary.  Here is some information about lay brothers:

 

http://laybrother.com/about-us/

 

Often times, these religious were referred to as tertiary.  Back then, the brothers and sisters wore habits but were not required to live within a convent or friary and were not bound to say the Divine Office.  St. Catherine of Siena and St. Rose of Lima lived the life of Dominican tertiaries, as well.

 

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14637b.htm

[Luigi]

In terms of monks, there's also a classification called "oblate." The one I met lived in a Benedictine monastery, wore the habit the same as the full-vowed monks, chanted the divine office with them, accepted the abbot as his superior, and had assigned work in the monastery. But he didn't sit it on the chapter meetings, didn't vote for the new abbot, and that sort of thing. I think he didn't take the vows (neither temporary nor permanent) that the rest of the community took. I believe Trappists also have oblates, and perhaps Cistercians do as well. I don't know about other orders.

 

The one I met was an older man with grown children; he entered the monastery after his wife died. I think an oblate must keep his money separate from the monastery's, too. When he needed to go into a nursing home, he moved to another city (where a son lived); he died and was buried in that city. But he lived in the monastery for better than 10 years - maybe a lot longer than that.

 

Again, I don't know if an oblate is defined as a lay monk according to canon law or anything. My point is that he lived the life of a monk but remained a lay person in terms of his state of life.

[OnlySunshine]

The Franciscan Friars of the Renewal also have lay brothers.  They do, however, profess vows and are very much a part of the community but they have discerned that their role is to be a helper, not study and be ordained to the priesthood.  I've met several of them and their joy is evident from the work they do.  The strive to be part of the community they serve.

 

http://franciscanfriars.com/vocations/religious-life/

[maximillion]

Do these lay brothers have voting rights in Chapter MM? I ask because that was another ancient distinction between lay and 'chior'.

 

On of the reasons - besides the willingness to do away with the class system, that VII changed things was to bring parity of governance and permit everyone have a voice in the decision making process.

[1054]

Thank you to everyone for your responses! 
 

This is a great question, but I think it might be good if you could narrow it down or clarify it just a bit more.

 

I.e., what exactly do you mean by "lay religious"? Do you mean members of religious communities who aren't also ordained priests or deacons (which is the technical sense of the term)? 

 

Or were you thinking more like non-monastic forms of religious life? Or forms of consecrated life that aren't "religious" properly so-called, like societies of apostolic life? Or forms of consecrated life like secular institutes, where members live lives that are outwardly indistinguishable from ordinary lay people? Or maybe you had something like new lay movements in mind, where some members commit to living a more radical evangelical life without being consecrated "officially"?

 

But in any case, I'm sure there are plenty of people here who can be helpful. 

To be perfectly honest, I was rather vague as I didn't (don't) know enough of the complexities to clarify.  This was made abundantly clear to me as I was wording the original posting.  At one point I was even going to ask what the differences were between a lay brother / sister from those who had taken vows -- then it dawned on me that I didn't even know if there was perhaps a form of vows that the lay religious did take...  If not properly vows, then even a more formalized commitment to the community. 

This being said, I was mainly interested in the former role of lay monks and nuns that lived within the monastery.  In these cases was it expected that they would live their entire lives with the community (not considering sickness or need of a nursing home as pointed out by the example of oblate by Luigi)?  Or was it often a temporary role?  That is, in practice, would one live within the monastery as a lay monk or nun for a few years and then leave? 
 

The status of "lay sister" was actually abolished by the Second Vatican Council in Perfectae Caritatis.  

"Unless conditions really suggest something else, care should be taken that there be only one class of Sisters in communities of women. Only that distinction of persons should be retained which corresponds to-the diversity of works for which the Sisters are destined, either by special vocation from God or by reason of special aptitude." (Perfectae caritatis, #15)

Thank you, I hadn't realized this.  Do you know why this was?  Was the role simply abolished due to what Maximillion pointed out that it was often the role of the nobility's servants?  No more nobles becoming monastic, no more need for a special role for their servants to fill? 

 

The days when those in religious life were separated into lay and monastic are long gone..........

 

In an enclosed order they are all monastics ( except maybe for the externs ).

 

The separation was an ancient one dating back to the times when the nobility went into RL along with their servants, later this was a separation between the more well educated ( basically, those who could read ) and the others. Traditionally, lay religious members tended to have a more physical role, leaving contemplation/study/chant to the others.

Again, thanks for all the wonderful information.  Going to look into those links MaterMisericordiae supplied...
 

[OnlySunshine]

Do these lay brothers have voting rights in Chapter MM? I ask because that was another ancient distinction between lay and 'chior'.

 

On of the reasons - besides the willingness to do away with the class system, that VII changed things was to bring parity of governance and permit everyone have a voice in the decision making process.

 

I don't know how their chapter works.  They used to have their Rule and Constitutions on their website but the link is inactive.  :(

[Nunsuch]

As far as women religious are concerned, yes, the changes at Vatican II are based mainly on the fact that the class/status differences that originally justified lay sisters no longer apply. Plus, it seemed a violation of the understanding that baptism confers the same value on each individual.  Of course, some women may not have either the interest or the ability to, say, earn a college degree, and someone has to do the cooking.  But all should be eligible to have a say in governance issues (lay sisters didn't used to be eligible to vote or be voted for in community elections, for example, or to serve as superiors).

 

Men's communities are different. I was at the 1994 synod on religious life, and many people assumed that one of the changes that would be authorized was that non-ordained (technically "lay") members of men's congregations/orders would be permitted to serve as major superiors. That change was NOT authorized--in so-called "mixed" communities (those with ordained and unordained members) the major superior must be a priest. This is historically problematic, especially when we realize that neither St. Francis nor St. Benedict was a priest--thus, under today's rules, neither would be able to be at the head of the order they founded!  Personally, I think this change should have been made, but somehow no one consulted me or took my advice....  :hehe2:

 

An oblate is not the same thing as a "lay" vowed member of a religious community (and women's monasteries have Oblates, too).  They are more similar to secular third orders than to monastics, although a few oblates live in the monasteries to which  they are connected.

 

And now, this college professor will go read a mystery novel!  Sorry if this reads as a lecture; coincidentally, I am in the early stages of writing a paper for an academic conference next spring on the the end of the "lay sister" category in the aftermath of Vatican II, so I'll be doing a lot of thinking about this matter over the next few months.

 

 

[Sponsa-Christi]

Men's communities are different. I was at the 1994 synod on religious life, and many people assumed that one of the changes that would be authorized was that non-ordained (technically "lay") members of men's congregations/orders would be permitted to serve as major superiors. That change was NOT authorized--in so-called "mixed" communities (those with ordained and unordained members) the major superior must be a priest. This is historically problematic, especially when we realize that neither St. Francis nor St. Benedict was a priest--thus, under today's rules, neither would be able to be at the head of the order they founded!  Personally, I think this change should have been made, but somehow no one consulted me or took my advice....  :hehe2:

 

 

 

That's a very good point about the two founders.

 

But, I think the reason that non-ordained religious brothers can't serve as superiors in mixed communities is because, if this were to happen, then this would mean that lay people would be giving priests their assignments. Technically, this would be "lay investiture" which is strictly forbidden. 

 

Lay investiture is theologically problematic as well, because priestly ministry is a consequence of the authority that Christ gave to his Apostles, (but not to his followers in general). So when a priest is assigned to a particular ministry, his priestly authority in that role depends on some sort of "apostolic" source---usually his bishop, but sometimes also a non-bishop clerical religious superior. But, if a non-ordained man was able to assign a ministry to a priest, then this "apostolic" connection is missing.

 

(I hope that makes sense!)

[freedomreigns]

Do these lay brothers have voting rights in Chapter MM? I ask because that was another ancient distinction between lay and 'chior'.

 

On of the reasons - besides the willingness to do away with the class system, that VII changed things was to bring parity of governance and permit everyone have a voice in the decision making process.

Within the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal the "lay brothers" in final profession are fully members of the community and do indeed have voting rights.  They are just not ordained.  So they are fully religious but not priests.

[Nunsuch]

Thanks, Sponsa Christi, for that information.  I study women religious, not men, so what you said is very interesting, and logical to me. But I'm still not wholly persuaded that the significance of the vows shouldn't outweigh the matter of ordination within the structures of religious life.  However, I will stick to the women's congregations!

 

I do know that a founder like John Baptiste de la Salle very specifically prohibited ordained men from entering the Christian Brothers so that there would not be a "two-class" structure to the congregation (thus, as a priest, he never became a Christian Brother).  

 

This is a very interesting subject to me.... Glad it came up.

[Luigi]

Speaking only of monks (but I think applies to monastic women as well):

 

A monk is a monk is a monk. Or a friar is a friar is a friar. The non-ordained (lay) brothers go through the same stages as the ordained monks: postulancy, novitiate, three-years-of-simple-vows, solemn (lifetime) vows. They live in the monastery the rest of their lives (unless they're sent to a new foundation). They vote in chapter the same as the ordained monks.

 

If a monk is chosen to be a priest, he goes on for seminary studies, but that has nothing to do with his vows to live as a member of the particular monastic community. That has only to do with his role/ministry within the community.

 

As mentioned elsewhere, there are canon law limitations on who can hold what positions within the monastery, but I think that relates only to prior/abbot. I know that in some of the Dominican provinces, brothers hold pretty high-ranking positions, but not the top one (whatever that's properly called).