SFO Terminology and Form I - Page 3

Marauder · #31 Jan 23, '12, 10:39 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julia Mae

I think that's the 2nd time ITT. You said it to me about the second time you posted. Maybe you don't even know you do it. You aren't the only one and I wish people would stop doing this. I have yet to hear anyone ask, "Do people on the forum think I have a vocation to the SFO?"

It sounds like you are failing to assume good faith in what people are posting. Must I qualify every time I use the word "you" with whether it is a generic "you", a particular poster or the OP? Nowhere have I said OP you are not called to join SFO so quit now. Everyone should assume best of intentions when people write on here.

As I said in the line you quote. If a person, whether it be the OP or anyone else discerning joining SFO or any order for that matter's true purpose is to dictate to the Order how it can improve then it may not be the Order they are called to join. Especially an Order that prides obedience and humility above all else. All the posts that give advice say to pray, discern, etc. A person that remains steadfast without humility will not mesh well with the Franciscan charism. In one of the early posts I recognized that I had traits like this, it was overcoming those traits that pointed to the true calling, so I definitely would never say someone that I have never met on an online forum isn't called to SFO.

Again assume good faith. We can give guidelines and tell people what traits work and don't work within the charism, otherwise it is hollow guidance. What is better, giving someone a true picture of what discernment is like or acting like "everyone gets in, no problem, just drink the Kool Aide, don't worry it will be fine."

People need to realize that discernment is a two-way street, both the individual and the fraternity have a say in whether someone is admitted to a fraternity. The discernment process should be viewed as a win/win situation. If you are called you will be admitted, if not and the problems are insurmountable, then you weren't meant to be in. No matter what exploring your spirituality should be viewed as a good thing.

EvelynEVF · #32 Jan 23, '12, 12:26 pm

This came up in the OP's thread with Roman numeral II, and I wanted to mention it here. It's very important in formation that it not be about giving the best possible impression. Again, I think it's like dating a bit, in that initially you feel each other out and don't reveal too much, but as the commitment deepens, so does your knowledge of the other. How is the council to make a decision if a person is not being him/herself? Yes, I argued with two members of the council, had some very deep personal discussions and disagreements, and I feel quite certain that they based their decisions about me on reality.

if a person is afraid that "If I let them see who I really am and what my strong opinions are, they will misunderstand me and vote against me," then either the candidate is not trusting the Holy Spirit to work through the council or b) the candidate has an intuitive understanding that something is seriously wrong with the council. In either case, it clearly isn't a good fit.

joanofarc2008 · #33 Jan 23, '12, 1:05 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by EvelynEVF

This came up in the OP's thread with Roman numeral II, and I wanted to mention it here. It's very important in formation that it not be about giving the best possible impression. Again, I think it's like dating a bit, in that initially you feel each other out and don't reveal too much, but as the commitment deepens, so does your knowledge of the other. How is the council to make a decision if a person is not being him/herself? Yes, I argued with two members of the council, had some very deep personal discussions and disagreements, and I feel quite certain that they based their decisions about me on reality.

if a person is afraid that "If I let them see who I really am and what my strong opinions are, they will misunderstand me and vote against me," then either the candidate is not trusting the Holy Spirit to work through the council or b) the candidate has an intuitive understanding that something is seriously wrong with the council. In either case, it clearly isn't a good fit.

I think this brings up a good point. In my case I told the person how I felt when she did certain things. i know it went back to the council. I know it didn't look good for me but I was asked about it and I got a chance to defend myself. The other person is planning on going and saying her peace to the council without ever telling the person directly. I did not feel that was fair to the professed member. This is someone I will be in a community with for a lifetime. How could I go behind this person's back now and feel OK with her five years from now. I think the Holy Spirit will look more kindly on that action as formation continues.

iloveangels · #34 Jan 23, '12, 2:27 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julia Mae

Where did He do that?

I'm hard-pressed to think of a time Francis did it.

IMO, just from reading your posts, "I want to understand all of this," expresses a desire for control. Francis told the brothers who couldn't read not to learn. We want control because things scare us, like, "What if I go and I'm not good enough."

OTOH, it does't mean the SFO isn't for you and I wish folks would stop saying stuff like that.

We're not saying that, Julia. If I understand him correctly, he is saying that there is some question among those in his formation group about his vocation.

We are saying that the tone of his posts and the methods he has chosen to go after them in dispute over the whole thing are a) not Franciscan in tone, and b) not in line with where he is in the process. Exploring whether one has a vocation is just exactly that. One doesn't decide they want a vocation and then go after it like they go after a new car or even a new job. And surely not like an argument that they have to "win."

No one has a "right" to profession in any order in the church. These are vocations that one is called to and one responds to. Not everyone has a vocation to a third order. Many people do not. There is nothing tragic or wrong about that. Being in a third order is not objectively any worse or better than being in any other sort of Christian community. Most of the Church does not belong to a third order, and that's how it's supposed to be.

Most of the laypeople in the church are called to be Catholics primarily in parish and natural community--work and family. That's where they're supposed to seek holiness. That is their vocation, their calling, and that's where they're supposed to respond.

Important: Regardless of what the calling is--one's response to it in grace and fidelity--is what really matters.

iloveangels · #35 Jan 23, '12, 2:50 pm

I believe the advice has also been given that if this fraternity or order doesn't fit him personally, it might be good to look at other fraternities or even other third orders. And to look at membership in parish life very closely as a primary vocation.

Everyone has a vocation to something and he needs to find out what that is. Fuming about a fraternity is kind of wasting time and effort on this account--it's probably not getting him any closer to responding to God in his real vocation, whatever that is, simply because all this arguing is not how one responds to a calling.

Luigi Daniele · #36 Jan 23, '12, 2:50 pm

I've lived this. The fraternity has to have the right of refusal, as it were...even if the person has been in formation for quite some time, if the circumstances warrant it. I have seen an OFS chapter go from 40 members to 7, because they had 4 really bad candidates in a row. Not Franciscan, at all. But the professed members either didn't care, didn't want to get involved, or were unaware (how, I don't know). If this OFS "journey home" thing works out, I will never allow this to happen again (although I think that the remaining core gets this). It is not Franciscan, let alone Catholic, to allow someone to remain in their errors, and tacitly seem to be agreeing with them.

Sorry, needed to get that off my chest.

iloveangels · #37 Jan 23, '12, 3:16 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by joanofarc2008

I don't know if I agree with this last part. I was always taught that we have the charism and that is why we are called to this vocation. It is through vocation that we further develop this charism. This also seems in line with paragraph 12 of Lumen Gentium and several other writings. This is just an opinion but it is a pretty strong one.

Yes we go through TranSFOrmation but we I believe we do so on the backdrop of a charism we already were gifted through the Holy Spirit.

I believe this is correct, yes. There are things that indicate the vocation is present at the very outset, even if they are not yet fully developed at that time. A vocation is not like a pretty coat that we procure for ourselves and then put on; it's not like an organization that we choose to join out of the blue and then mold ourselves to.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julia Mae

If we were already Franciscans we wouldn't need to be there.

This is exactly backwards. The main event is not getting accepted, although that's important. It's living the grace of the vocation out in fidelity. A Franciscan needs to be there and that's why fraternal community is so very important. (I've learned this the hard way, so I know this.)

Luigi Daniele · #38 Jan 23, '12, 3:27 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by iloveangels

This is exactly backwards. The main event is not getting accepted, although that's important. It's living the grace of the vocation out in fidelity. A Franciscan needs to be there and that's why fraternal community is very important. (I've learned this the hard way, so I know this.)

Yup. We are there to support each other. One month I am supported, the next I support. You can not be a Franciscan "at large" (anymore)*

* although I do believe that there probably should be exceptions. I feel badly for people that live hours away from the nearest fraternity

iloveangels · #39 Jan 23, '12, 3:32 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luigi Daniele

Yup. We are there to support each other. One month I am supported, the next I support. You can not be a Franciscan "at large" (anymore)*

* although I do believe that there probably should be exceptions. I feel badly for people that live hours away from the nearest fraternity

With technology now, that's less of an issue for people who are professed and have to move away to a place where they would be hours away from a fraternity, etc. And for people who are home-bound due to illness or old age.

And you know, sometimes that's how new fraternities are founded, when a few professed people move to an isolated area and take up fraternal communion with people in the new area who have a vocation also.

Luigi Daniele · #40 Jan 23, '12, 3:36 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by iloveangels

With technology now, that's less of an issue for people who are professed and have to move away to a place where they would be hours away from a fraternity, etc. And for people who are home-bound due to illness or old age.

True, but I am afraid that the "you have to attend meetings" restriction still stands, as far as I know.

iloveangels · #41 Jan 23, '12, 3:38 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luigi Daniele

True, but I am afraid that the "you have to attend meetings" restriction still stands, as far as I know.

Yes, because part of the charism is fraternity, which is brotherhood and sisterhood. One can't be a Franciscan alone. It doesn't make any sense with the rest of the charism.

Even when people can no longer make it to the meetings, the fraternity should to make accommodations to visit and share with them, or at least call them frequently. Our fraternity has a number of "stops" including an assisted living home for our meetings. We don't forget people just because are disabled or they get old and can no longer drive themselves around.

In fact, I was professed at mass in the chapel of an assisted living facility many miles from my own home. That's where we were scheduled to be on that day, so that's how it was set up with the priest and all. We get around.

Luigi Daniele · #42 Jan 23, '12, 3:55 pm

Very cool. I am glad that you all are that numerous and that active.

iloveangels · #43 Jan 23, '12, 3:56 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luigi Daniele

Very cool. I am glad that you all are that numerous and that active.

Actually, we're not numerous. We're a pretty sorry looking little bunch but we're Franciscan anyway.

Luigi Daniele · #44 Jan 23, '12, 3:57 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by iloveangels

Actually, we're not numerous. We're a pretty sorry looking little bunch but we're Franciscan anyway.

Well, considering how Francis went around, the fact that you're sorry looking is proof that you are Franciscans

Kevin812 · #45 Jan 23, '12, 4:03 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by iloveangels

Yes, because part of the charism is fraternity, which is brotherhood and sisterhood. One can't be a Franciscan alone. It doesn't make any sense with the rest of the charism.

I will have to disagree on this point. The Franciscan Family is huge, diverse and far flung. The above statement is to broad even for OFS. A Franciscan is Franciscan whether he is in Fraternity or alone. I agree with the assessment that 'fraternity' is important, but I think it has been to narrowly defined.