www.byzcath.org Forums the monastic factor

In Eastern Christianity especially, monasteries are understood as spiritual hospitals and centers of spiritual examples. This is true not only for the monks. It is also true --perhaps especially-- for the laity.

What do you think is the role of monasteries in the revitalization of the Byzantine Catholic Church and in its efforts of evangelization?

-- John

there is, in the Franciscan Order, a place for people to join without entering a monastery, but living the vows in the secular world. this leads to the suggestion that perhaps our Eastern monks might want to encourage such amongst the EC faithful. that would be one way for the monasteries to aid in evangelizing efforts.after all, theere is more to evangelism than just sticking tracts into people's hands, etc.
Much Love,
Jonn

The strong connection with monasteries is an idea in the developmental stages that came out strongly at our Whiting meeting. Watch http://byzantineevangelization.com/index.htm for details.

CDL

Dear Friends,

I think that the current challenge is to see how laity can benefit from the spiritual insights and practices of monasticism in the world as an aid to further their Theosis and evangelical witness.

Alex

Let me start by saying I am not against monastics.

As for monasticsm being a necessary component of evangelization one need only look to the Antiochian Archdiocese, undoubtedly the most evangelistic of the Orthodox Churches in America. They do not have a single monastery in America and are quite good at evangelizing. So while I do not doubt the benefits of having a strong monastic foundation I don't see how it can be seen as an indespensible necessity either.

Fr. Deacon Lance

As a Latin my voice probably carries less weight in this argument but living in a grossly secularised country referred to by its Catholic Bishops as 'neo pagan' I will offer what I feel is neccessary for evangelisation.

Religious! Give us proffessed religious! Lots and lots of religious! PLEASE!!

Monks, friars, nuns...anything. The evangelistic potential of religious for a mission territory like neo-pagan England is almost unequalled. You wouldnt even need to start new parishes you could just endore a small religious house with about 8 inhabitants to set up in the industrial areas, housing projects and council estates and have them bring their faith, hope and charity to those who need it most.

The one thing the New Evangelisation needs to take it forward is a strong drive from the religious orders. The history of the Church in the Occident illustrates that everytime she has undergone a crisis since the Ostrogoths invaded Italy it has been the religious orders who managed to turn the situation around.

I have seen a link to a Byzantine Benedictine Oblate group, but can't remember if there was one for the Byzantine Franciscans... I think they would be good for evangelization...

james, currently studying monastics etc...

Good Luck with your research.

http://www.rpmwebworx.com/holydorm/

Holy Dormition Monastery

570-788-8400

Hi Everybody !

I have been thinking on this question and the responses that you have given (thank you), within the overall context of evangelization. I have come up with this:

I think our only hope is our life in Christ. Thus, our only means to our hope is being open to Jesus Christ in our lives. Therefore, the way to revitalizing the Church and evangelization is the whatever means that Christ our God has set before us to live our lives in Christ.

For the Roman Church, that �means� seems to be renewed religious orders. For the Eastern Church, the �means� seems to be holy monasteries.

Allow me to explain.

The current situation in the Catholic Church (at least, in the so called �advanced world�) is decline. There are declining numbers of people who consistently participate in the liturgical life of the Church (i.e., attending Mass / Divine Liturgy weekly). There are declining numbers of people who assent to the fullness of the Gospel teachings of the Church. There are declining numbers of people who practice the moral teachings of the Church. And the current question is: How to reverse this trend of decline?

To answer this question, I have often considered how the early Church thrived. 12 apostles changed the world. Some might quibble with numbers: there were 13 apostles with St. Paul, plus there were the 72 disciples, plus the holy women (including the holy Theotokos), etc. Yet, the numbers (however reckoned) were small. And the question remains: how did such a small number of people change the world?

But, I have realized that I missed the point. It wasn�t 72 men who changed the world. It wasn�t 12 men who changed the world.

It was only one man who changed the world: Jesus Christ.

St. Paul, I think points this out. In his letter to the Galatians (2:20), he wrote: �While I live, not I who live, but Christ who lives in me.� And this came from St. Paul�s encounter with Jesus. After St. Paul was knocked from his ride on the road to Damascus, Jesus said to him, �Saul, Saul, why do you persecute Me?� (Acts of the Apostles, 9: 3 - 5) Jesus didn�t say, �Why do you persecute My followers?� Jesus said, �Why do you persecute Me?�

Jesus Himself, I think, made this point in the Gospel. When He was visiting St. Martha and St. Mary, St. Martha was busy trying to entertain Jesus, but St. Mary was sitting at His feet listening to Him. And when St. Martha complained, Jesus said to her: �Martha, Martha, you are anxious about many things. There is only one thing needful. Mary has chosen the better part, and it will not be taken from her.� (The Gospel according to St. Luke, 10: 38 - 42)

I submit that this teaching of Jesus has the answer to the question of the revitalization and evangelization of the Church. As St. Nicholas of Cabasilas observed in his masterpiece, �The Life in Christ,� it is precisely our life in Christ that gives life to us and the Church. How else could that man have written a masterpiece of sacramental theology while his whole Christian world (the Byzantine empire) was collapsing all around him? For that matter, how could St. Augustine have likewise written his masterpiece, the City of God, under similar circumstances? The very opposites of revitalization and evangelization were occurring --literally-- all around those men; yet, those men came to a point of sanctity in their lives that has since inspired generations of Christians and the Church as a whole.

I think we --me-- have been missing the point. Like St. Martha, we --me-- have been anxious about many things. But, we --me-- have failed in the one thing necessary: our life in Christ.

It might not seem like great personal sanctity will produce anything practical. After all, St. Nicholas Cabasilas� Byzantine Empire soon fell after he lived; St. Augustine�s Western Roman Empire soon fell too.

Indeed, to add a modern confessor to consideration, Cardinal Francis Xavier Nguyen Van Thuan of Vietnam spent years in prison while the Communist government of Vietnam tried to destroy the Church in that country. (See �The Miracle of Hope� by Andre Nguyen Van Chau, published by Pauline Books / The Daughters of St. Paul, in the year 2003, ISBN 0-8198-4822-0, especially pages 206 - 207.) Yet, as the holy bishop was kneeling alone in prayer one day, in the utter darkness (physical and spiritual) of solitary confinement, lamenting to the Lord that he was being kept from the necessary work of his vocation, he received an enlightenment of a sort. He was informed in prayer that �There is God�s work, and then there is God.� In other words, God is the worker and God is the work; and he was only God�s instrument. He understood that because he was given to understand that Jesus Christ was at His strongest when we was apparently at His weakest, the Crucifixion, because He thereby redeemed the world. Thus, he understood that his part was to totally trust in God, to do whatever God set before him to do, and to let God take care of the rest. In that moment, the bishop was liberated from his worries to truly and totally serve God. And, in the fullness of time, he was later able to do much �practical� stuff for the Church: ministering (to a limited extent) to his people, writing books, being set free to the Vatican where he could reach the rest of the world with his words and example, and so on. All these things the world considers �practical.� Yet, the real and true practical event was when this holy bishop fully gave himself and his life over to Jesus Christ, without any reservations and with complete trust. It was only then that Christ could do great things in him and through him.

The Church is Jesus Christ and all who are united to Him. It is not our job to preserve the Church; Christ will take care of that. Instead, it is our job, with His grace, to live fully in Christ. Then, Christ will be able to live fully in and through us.

So, the real issue is: How can we live our lives fully in Christ?

The answer is the Gospel.

But, how can people empty themselves of themselves (kenosis) so as to be filled with the fullness of Christ (plerosis)? The answer seems to be: wherever complete renunciation of self to Christ is practiced, taught and encouraged.

For the Eastern Church, this seems to happen most often in monasteries. Yes, there have been holy single people, holy married people and holy diocesan clergy who gave their lives completely to Christ. But the means that seems to work the best, over time, historically and in the present, for the Eastern Church seems to be monasticism.

After all, it was Egyptian and Syrian monks who lived and helped others to practice complete dedication to Jesus Christ after the age of pagan Roman persecutions was done. And, it has been monasteries that helped spread the Church (East and West) into the wilderness of both the pagan countryside and the interior of pagan cities.

Many of the responses to my initial question cited religious orders as potential vehicles of renewal in the Church. I would say yes, but with two qualifications.

First, religious orders seem to function most consistently only in the Roman Church. For whatever reason, the Eastern Church did not develop religious orders on their own; and those that have sought to serve the Eastern Church seem to be small in numbers and to have had limited results. Rather, in the Eastern Church (for whatever reason), it seems that the concept and the life of religious orders just do not mesh well with practice of Eastern Christianity.

Second, religious orders need to be periodically renewed. It seems that many of the orders become corrupt or otherwise ineffective after a few centuries or so after their founding. The pattern seems to be this: The founders of religious orders were genuinely holy people, and their initial missions were successful. That holiness and success, in turn, attracted new members to their communities who were perhaps not as holy as the first generations. Simultaneously, the holiness and success of the first generations of the orders stimulated people in the world to give the orders a great amount of physical wealth and worldly prestige and so on. Thereby, the orders started to lose their spiritual commitment and focus. And so, a few centuries after their founding, the orders seem to need reform or they died out. The reform usually seems to have been accomplished by a new order (or a new monastery) that was an off-shoot of the original. Then, the pattern seems to repeat: with the reforming order itself needing to be reformed within a few centuries.

For example, I�m thinking of the Franciscans: who produced the reforming Capuchins about 300 years after St. Francis and who now are producing Fr. Groeschel�s reforming order (in the U.S.) of the Franciscans of the Renewal ( http://www.franciscanfriars.com ). I�m also thinking of the Carmelites, which got started in the 1200s or so (as the current community), and which produced the reforming order Discalced Carmelites in the 1500s with St. Teresa of Avila and St. John of the Cross, and who now have two new reforming orders (in the U.S.): the Society of Our Mother of Peace (for men, http://www.stlvocations.org/Extreme_Living/socmotherofpeace.shtml ) and the Daughters of Our Mother of Peace (for women, http://www.stlvocations.org/Extreme_Living/motherofpeace.shtml ). I�m sure there are other examples out there, but these are the two orders that I have examined more closely and observed this trend: founding by total renunciation to Jesus Christ, spiritual success, worldly rewards, worldliness, renewal with a new order that gets back to total renunciation to Jesus Christ

So, if the real issue is �How can we live our lives fully in Christ?�, the question becomes: �Where, right now, is the Gospel being practiced fully by total renunciation of self (kenosis) so as to receive, live and give the fullness of Christ in the Holy Spirit (plerosis)?�

Wherever that is done, there is the renewal of the Church. By their prayers and by their example, by the Christ who lives in and through them, they who give themselves totally to Christ teach the rest of us how to live our life in Christ.

I remember something my dad told me. When he was a youth, he heard of a young man who went to a (Roman) Catholic seminary. His family was too poor to buy him a missal. But, his mother gave him a Rosary and told him if he prayed that, every day, he would become a priest. At the end of formation, many of the young men who could afford a missal had left the program and did not become priests. But, the man who prayed his rosary every day did become a priest. The lesson? Reform begins with the individual who actually lives the life in Christ.

I have cited two religious orders (Franciscan and Carmelite) that I know of that are living the Gospel fully in the Roman Church here in the U.S. There are, God willing, others. They seem to be the wave of the future for the renewal of the Roman Catholic Church in the U.S.

Are there any monasteries in the Eastern Catholic Church in the U.S. (or anywhere?) which are fully living the Gospel?

If the answer is yes, I think the Eastern Catholic Church in the U.S. needs to send some of its clergy there for advanced / further formation. Then, they can return in order to improve their local churches by prayer and by example . . . and by starting likewise holy monasteries in their areas.

If the answer is no, I think it�s time for some holy deacon or priest or nun to get permission from the bishop, and get a secluded place, and just do it --to found a holy monastery, wherever they are.

In sum, all the outreach in the world won�t be effective if there isn�t an effective program of holiness to follow-up and follow-through. It seems that the renewed religious orders are the main means for producing holiness in the Roman Catholic Church, and it seems that holy monasteries are the most consistently effective means for producing holiness in the Eastern Church.

Either way, it is holiness that matters the most for the renewal and the spread of the Church. For it is our life in Christ that enables Christ to live in and through us. The Church is Christ�s mystical Body. Thus, the renewal and the spread of the Church is not a happening of our own endeavor. The renewal and the spread of the Church is Christ�s life in and through us. And Christ�s life in us can only take place when our life is in Christ. Hence, whether it is in renewed religious orders (in the Roman Church) or whether it is in holy monasteries (in the Eastern Church), it is there that holiness is most effectively cultivated: by the practice of kenosis, for the fullness of plerosis, that is our life in Christ.

-- John

Dear John:

Thanks for mentioning the role of religious orders in the Catholic Church, especially their value to evangelization efforts.

I would like to re-emphasize, however, that the bulk of evangelization in the Catholic Church today and in modern times has been more and more on the shoulders of religious missionaries, assisted by committed laity.

Look beyond the traditional religious orders, like the Franciscans and the Carmelites, and we see missionary religious orders, male and female, and laity in the forefront of evangelization.

They are not monastery- or convent-bound but, rather, they are in the field toiling for the "vineyard of the Lord" and, oftentimes, sacrificing their own lives.

They provide varied services in education, hospital administration, social services, and catechesis.

This reminds me of the present work of the Missionary Sisters of Charity (of Mother Teresa of Calcutta) and of the abduction, rape, and murder of four missionaries from the U.S. at the height of the civil war in El Salvador, who were remembered yesterday on the 25th anniversary of their martyrdom:

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=5493

Amado

Dear Amado,

I would agree with most of your post, especially about Mother Teresa's order. However, I think that example supports the point I was trying to make. Mother Teresa liked to call her sisters (and everyone?) to be contemplatives in the heart of the world. That, I think, is what the Church needs much more of: being contemplatives in the heart of the world.

My question is how to most effectively stimulate that? How can we stimulate more people to be contemplatives in the heart of the world? In the Western Church, the main vehicle for doing so seems to be the religious orders. But in the Eastern Church, the main vehicle for doing so seems to be (at least, historically) holy monasteries.

I would disagree that the Franciscans are cloistered. They have friaries, but they are usually pretty active outside of them.

-- John

Dear John:

I know the Franciscans are NOT cloistered.

I think there are only 6 or so male religious orders in the Catholic Church (East and West) which are MONASTIC, in the strict sense of the word. Even the Carmelites, Discalced or not, are NOT monastic in this sense.

Other than the 6 or so MONASTIC orders, all male religious orders are out in the world following their respective charisms. Ditto for the non-monastic orders of female religious.

Amado

I was a Benedictine oblate (lay person connected with a Benedictine monastery) for several years before we moved. Oblates usually live within driving distance of monasteries, hold regular meetings in their local communities, and bi-yearly ones at the monastery itself as well as attend programs to enhance their spiritual life and grow in community life. Oblates then carry the Benedictine ideals of monastic spirituality as it is lived out in the world outside the monastery with them into their ordinary lives whether at home or at work...To witness Christ is their call.

I know there are Byzantine Benedictine monasteries but not sure if they also have oblates or lay associates connected with them.

Anyway the key I see in evangelization through the monastery whether eastern or western is to offer hospitality and teach others to pray for and practice hospitality. Out of that example evangelization surely flows. It goes beyond 'passing out tracks' as someone said here.

And, of course, there should be hospitality coming from the monastery itself...as it is open to receive guests even as Christ is received. Welcoming others outside the community to Vespers and Divine Liturgy would be a way to do this. The Benedictine community where I was an oblate held a Raspberry festival on a yearly basis in which they welcomed many from the surrounding farms and cities and some from afar.

Porter.

Monasteries are only for the monks in them, not for the rest of the Church. Some people, in order to work out their salvation in fear and trembling, become monks. Others don't. They may be a edifying example, but that's it. Their primary means of sanctification are the sacraments just like anyone else. They do not have some sort of trick that we don't know about.

Dear Adversus,

I would disagree, Brother!

Monastics in the Church are like the batteries in a car!

They set an example for all of us to follow, even though we are in the world.

And their prayers are breathed over all of us by the Holy Spirit in the Body of Christ.

Alex