FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Which Religious Orders Are Dying? Which Are Thriving?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
In case you guys didn't see this article linked to in the FE Twitter feed (see bottom of any forum page), this is a must-see article about which religious orders are dying -- and which are not only surviving, but growing:  https://onepeterfive.com/data-death-religious-orders/

Excerpt, my emphasis in bold:
  
Quote:We hesitate to use the word “conservative” to describe the pre-conciliar period or “liberal” to describe the post-conciliar period. These words represent human ideological constructs and have political meanings that vary from one country to the next. In the search for an appropriate term, we find no alternative other than “traditional” to apply to those institutes that seem to still have a future. Those whose members obey the laws of their founders and preach and teach the gospel in accordance with what was handed down to them, dress and comport themselves as their predecessors did, and pray as their predecessors did seem to have a future. In short, if their religious lives represent a continuation of the visions of their founders, and that of the Founder of our Faith, Jesus Christ, then they seem to have a future. 
 
Edited to add this, found via a link from a comment left in response to the above article. 
 
Quote:The pope also acknowledged that he’s worried about the decline of religious vocations in the West, something for which he said he hopes the next Synod of Bishops, directed to youth and vocational discernment, can address and suggest solutions.

Yet he’s also worried about the rise of some new religious institutes that attract many religious vocations, but which then fail, some because of the scandals of their founders. These, he said, are not inspired by the Holy Spirit but by a charismatic person.

Some of these new orders, Francis added, are “restorationist,” seemingly providing security when in reality they give “rigidity.”

“When they tell me that there is a congregation that draws so many vocations, I must confess that I worry,” he said. “The Spirit does not follow the logic of human success.”

Some of these new religious congregations, Francis denounced, are “Pelagians,” who want a return to asceticism and penance, “soldiers who seem ready to do anything for the defense of faith and morality, and then some scandal emerges involving the founder [male or female].”
(01-06-2018, 01:03 AM)VoxClamantis Wrote: [ -> ]In case you guys didn't see this article linked to in the FE Twitter feed (see bottom of any forum page), this is a must-see article about which religious orders are dying -- and which are not only surviving, but growing:  https://onepeterfive.com/data-death-religious-orders/

Excerpt, my emphasis in bold:
  
Quote:We hesitate to use the word “conservative” to describe the pre-conciliar period or “liberal” to describe the post-conciliar period. These words represent human ideological constructs and have political meanings that vary from one country to the next. In the search for an appropriate term, we find no alternative other than “traditional” to apply to those institutes that seem to still have a future. Those whose members obey the laws of their founders and preach and teach the gospel in accordance with what was handed down to them, dress and comport themselves as their predecessors did, and pray as their predecessors did seem to have a future. In short, if their religious lives represent a continuation of the visions of their founders, and that of the Founder of our Faith, Jesus Christ, then they seem to have a future. 

This is Vatican II.
(01-06-2018, 03:23 AM)Poche Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-06-2018, 01:03 AM)VoxClamantis Wrote: [ -> ]In case you guys didn't see this article linked to in the FE Twitter feed (see bottom of any forum page), this is a must-see article about which religious orders are dying -- and which are not only surviving, but growing:  https://onepeterfive.com/data-death-religious-orders/

Excerpt, my emphasis in bold:
  
Quote:We hesitate to use the word “conservative” to describe the pre-conciliar period or “liberal” to describe the post-conciliar period. These words represent human ideological constructs and have political meanings that vary from one country to the next. In the search for an appropriate term, we find no alternative other than “traditional” to apply to those institutes that seem to still have a future. Those whose members obey the laws of their founders and preach and teach the gospel in accordance with what was handed down to them, dress and comport themselves as their predecessors did, and pray as their predecessors did seem to have a future. In short, if their religious lives represent a continuation of the visions of their founders, and that of the Founder of our Faith, Jesus Christ, then they seem to have a future. 

This is Vatican II.
In its proper interpretation, yes.
(01-06-2018, 03:29 AM)In His Love Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-06-2018, 03:23 AM)Poche Wrote: [ -> ]This is Vatican II.
In its proper interpretation, yes.
Not that Francis and his bully-boy henchmen have any concept of its proper interpretation as they insult Tradition and any Faithful Catholic who actually wants to follow the Faith, and run roughshod over Traditional Orders (FFI) and even 'conservative' Orders that want to adhere to the Infallible Magisterium (SMOM).
(01-06-2018, 03:29 AM)In His Love Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-06-2018, 03:23 AM)Poche Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-06-2018, 01:03 AM)VoxClamantis Wrote: [ -> ]In case you guys didn't see this article linked to in the FE Twitter feed (see bottom of any forum page), this is a must-see article about which religious orders are dying -- and which are not only surviving, but growing:  https://onepeterfive.com/data-death-religious-orders/

Excerpt, my emphasis in bold:
  
Quote:We hesitate to use the word “conservative” to describe the pre-conciliar period or “liberal” to describe the post-conciliar period. These words represent human ideological constructs and have political meanings that vary from one country to the next. In the search for an appropriate term, we find no alternative other than “traditional” to apply to those institutes that seem to still have a future. Those whose members obey the laws of their founders and preach and teach the gospel in accordance with what was handed down to them, dress and comport themselves as their predecessors did, and pray as their predecessors did seem to have a future. In short, if their religious lives represent a continuation of the visions of their founders, and that of the Founder of our Faith, Jesus Christ, then they seem to have a future. 

This is Vatican II.
In its proper interpretation, yes.

So, 95+% of the bishops and priests over the last 50 years, including many who were at the council, have all been interpreting it incorrectly?
(01-06-2018, 04:29 PM)Dave01 Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-06-2018, 03:29 AM)In His Love Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-06-2018, 03:23 AM)Poche Wrote: [ -> ]This is Vatican II.
In its proper interpretation, yes.

So, 95+% of the bishops and priests over the last 50 years, including many who were at the council, have all been interpreting it incorrectly?
I think there might be a semantic distinction between 'proper' and 'correct'. At least I intended one. The 'proper' interpretation of V II is to read it in light of Tradition. Since the documents are deliberately written so that multiple 'correct' interpretations are available, there is no single 'correct' interpretation.
(01-06-2018, 04:45 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-06-2018, 04:29 PM)Dave01 Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-06-2018, 03:29 AM)In His Love Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-06-2018, 03:23 AM)Poche Wrote: [ -> ]This is Vatican II.
In its proper interpretation, yes.

So, 95+% of the bishops and priests over the last 50 years, including many who were at the council, have all been interpreting it incorrectly?
I think there might be a semantic distinction between 'proper' and 'correct'. At least I intended one. The 'proper' interpretation of V II is to read it in light of Tradition. Since the documents are deliberately written so that multiple 'correct' interpretations are available, there is no single 'correct' interpretation.

Yes, this was precisely my point - that it is fallacious for Trads to say that we just need to get back to the "correct" interpretation of Vatican II, after which everything will be fine.  

The fact that a Church document can have several "correct" interpretations, ranging from vernacular Mass in a giant metal box, facing the people and with liturgical dance, (the "everything has changed" interpretation), to continuing to do everything which was done before the council (the "nothing has changed" interpretation), to everything in between, is prima facie proof that the council and its documents should not be used as a reference point or basis for anyone who cares about Catholic Tradition.  

Imagine a math textbook which says: "It is certainly a valid opinion that 1+1 = 2....but on the other hand, it may equal 3. And some very intelligent people say it equals 4. And after all, math is a difficult subject, so can we really say what equals what? And who are we to judge anyhow?" Would anyone allow their children to study from this book, just because it is possible to conduct mental gymnastics from the text and arrive at somewhere close to the truth?

And of course, it is those groups who either actively reject (SSPX) or passively ignore (FSSP, IKSP) Vatican II which are precisely flourishing - a fact which I'm sure the Church hierarchy will continue to ignore for as long as humanly possible :) .
(01-06-2018, 03:23 AM)Poche Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-06-2018, 01:03 AM)VoxClamantis Wrote: [ -> ]In case you guys didn't see this article linked to in the FE Twitter feed (see bottom of any forum page), this is a must-see article about which religious orders are dying -- and which are not only surviving, but growing:  https://onepeterfive.com/data-death-religious-orders/

Excerpt, my emphasis in bold:
  
Quote:We hesitate to use the word “conservative” to describe the pre-conciliar period or “liberal” to describe the post-conciliar period. These words represent human ideological constructs and have political meanings that vary from one country to the next. In the search for an appropriate term, we find no alternative other than “traditional” to apply to those institutes that seem to still have a future. Those whose members obey the laws of their founders and preach and teach the gospel in accordance with what was handed down to them, dress and comport themselves as their predecessors did, and pray as their predecessors did seem to have a future. In short, if their religious lives represent a continuation of the visions of their founders, and that of the Founder of our Faith, Jesus Christ, then they seem to have a future. 

This is Vatican II.

In a mirror. In negative. Turned bass-ackwards and inside-out. On crack. In the mind of a madman. Reflected on the surface of a burning lake in Hell.
(01-06-2018, 04:58 PM)Dave01 Wrote: [ -> ]Yes, this was precisely my point - that it is fallacious for Trads to say that we just need to get back to the "correct" interpretation of Vatican II, after which everything will be fine.  

I would love to see Vatican II erased from all memory so I no longer have to hear those insidious damned words that every Catholic from 1960s onward has been puking up every darn day.
(01-06-2018, 01:03 AM)VoxClamantis Wrote: [ -> ]
Quote:The pope also acknowledged that he’s worried about the decline of religious vocations in the West, something for which he said he hopes the next Synod of Bishops, directed to youth and vocational discernment, can address and suggest solutions.

Yet he’s also worried about the rise of some new religious institutes that attract many religious vocations, but which then fail, some because of the scandals of their founders. These, he said, are not inspired by the Holy Spirit but by a charismatic person.

Some of these new orders, Francis added, are “restorationist,” seemingly providing security when in reality they give “rigidity.”

“When they tell me that there is a congregation that draws so many vocations, I must confess that I worry,” he said. “The Spirit does not follow the logic of human success.”

Some of these new religious congregations, Francis denounced, are “Pelagians,” who want a return to asceticism and penance, “soldiers who seem ready to do anything for the defense of faith and morality, and then some scandal emerges involving the founder [male or female].”

The average non sedevacantist traditional Catholic is putting all of his hope in these efforts and his pope crushes them.

Pretty cruel.
Pages: 1 2