Here in the Chicago area, we’re getting snow, snow, and more snow! Plus the winds are whipping around, so that when I look out the window, it’s like looking at a snow-globe that’s just been shaken. I’m not real fond of snow, but I love to engage with nature. So this morning, which BTW is World Day for Consecrated Life, I put on a ton of warm clothes and went outside with Sister Julie.

If there are religious sisters, brothers, priests or other consecrated persons who have been an important part of your life, we’d love to hear about them! Please share your thoughts in the comment box below.

Join the sisters and A Nun’s Life community at 6 p.m. Central Time (your time zone) at http://aNunsLife.org/LIVE for Praying with the Sisters live podcast and chat.

As a celibate, non-sex-having, vocationally-engaged person, I was intrigued by and a bit apprehensive of an article by Jamie Manson entitled Celibacy: Neither healthy nor helpful for the future of vocations in National Catholic Reporter (March 11, 2010).

Although Manson states somewhat parenthentically that she is “not suggesting that celibacy is wrong or unhealthy” and that “for some individuals, this choice is very life-giving”, I get the distinct impression from the entire article that such a choice would be fundamentally against the very nature of “today’s young adults”. Hmmm.

At the old age of 38 and a member of that old-fashioned Generation X, you can take my two cents for what they’re worth. First I concur 100% with the universal call to holiness. There is no such thing as a “higher” calling. You can slap the label “consecrated” or “ordained” or whatever on the calling but it’s still not any better or worse than any other calling. However God calls you is what is most fulfilling for you. True, we still have many remnants of pre-Vatican II ideas and those continue to affect how people understand their own calling and that of others.

I feel badly that Manson and others continue to experience an undervaluing of their desire for a “healthy, loving, committed sexual relationship” and their desire to devote their lives “to the service of the gospel”. But I don’t think changing a recognition of the value of celibacy in consecrated life is going to change that. I think that the problem is that the church (magisterium and people of God) hasn’t yet fully committed to the idea of the universal call to holiness. Even Manson herself seems to feel that the only way that people can be recognized as seeking “a healthy, loving, committed sexual relationship” and “being fully and authentically committed to bringing the life of God into the world” is through consecrated life. Otherwise, why the concern about being “banned” from consecrated life?

I guess I’m confused a bit (which happens at the old age of 38) because I fundamentally agree with Manson about vocation and calling, but there are so many negative celibacy over- and undertones in the article that I’m left wondering (a) if she really understands celibacy (celibacy is a far richer concept and experience than simply not being involved in a sexual relationship) and (b) what she’s really trying to say. Is it that religious life, consecrated virginity, the eremetical life, and other forms of consecrated virginity should lift the celibacy requirement?  Is it that there should be an additional form of consecrated life that recognizes the value of sexual relationships? Is it that the church still has a long way to go in truly promulgating the universal call to holiness? Is it that celibacy is fundamentally unnatural for young people today and into the future? Is it that celibacy’s only value is for the quirky few who find it life giving?

Well, those are a few thoughts from one quirky Gen X-er. What do you think?

* * *

Join two celibate women and others for prayer tonight at 6 p.m. Central Daylight Time at http://aNunsLife.org/LIVE (note: due to Daylight Saving Time our broadcast has shifted to UTC-5)

FP004 Feature Podcast on Consecrated Life with IHM Sisters recorded live on February 7, 2010. Sponsored by aNunsLife.org ministry. Topics include World Day for Consecrated Life, vocations, discernment, Catholic sisters and nuns, prayer, and more.

Click PLAY below or right-click here to download the MP3.

Subscribe to the A Nun’s Life Podcast:

Today we celebrated World Day for Consecrated Life by partnering with the IHM Vocations team to offer this hour-long podcast on vocations, discernment, and the lives of Catholic sisters today. We were delighted to be joined by IHM Sisters Carol Quigley, Michele Denton, Joyce Durosko, and Mary Bea Keeley.

Today is the World Day for Consecrated Life. It was initiated by the Vatican in 1997 and is an opportunity to celebrate the life and work of women and men religious and to pray for vocations to consecrated life.

In a recent news release, Cardinal Sean O’Malley, OFM Cap., chairman of the U.S. Bishops’ Committee on Clergy, Consecrated Life and Vocations, noted that “We Americans owe a huge debt of gratitude to the religious in our nation. Their loyal service to our church and country are unparalleled…. The presence of both apostolic and cloistered religious in our nation has been a source of spiritual comfort to many people, Catholic and non-Catholic alike. I don’t know of any other country that can make such a boast.”

A Nun’s Life is participating in today’s celebration by hosting a “social hour” with people discerning God’s call and with a guest blog post at From the Pews in the Back.

1. The social hour is on the Vocation Forum at 8 p.m. EST tonight. All are welcome. To participate in the discussion, you have to be a member of the forum (free and easy to register). Once you are a member, look for the topic “February 8 Social Hour” in the discussion area. Also, I put together some Suggestions for a “Live” Discussion.
2. On the blog From the Pews in the Back I wrote a post today called For the Sake of the Gospel. It’s based on the Sunday readings and talks about my own experience of being called to consecrated life. Stop by and offer your comments.

Have a blessed day!

Slate.com, the online news magazine, has an interesting but highly questionable assessment of consecrated and monastic life in the article A Monastic Kind of Life: How Catholic religious communities are trying to attract young people again. Have you read it? If not, it’s a must read. I’d love to hear your thoughts on it.

As for me, I found the article not only questionable but just plain wrong. Here are my thoughts.

1. The terminology is totally off. Monasticism is one form of consecrated life. Not all nuns, sisters, brothers, friars or priests live a monastic life.

2. Even though folks are quick to note the decline in numbers for consecrated life, they fail to note that the comparison is always to the early- to mid-1900s when there were 50+ people entering mainstream communities a year. But that time period is not characteristic of consecrated life throughout the history of Christianity. In fact that time period is more of an aberration because the history of consecrated life has never seen that kind of influx before nor possibly again.

3. Consecrated life was never meant to be a life for the masses. The viability of consecrated life is not dependent on numbers. True, some communities do end up disbanding but that too is under the guidance of the Holy Spirit just like the community’s founding was. We are not here to create a legacy but to do the work of God and live the Gospel in this particular vocation.

4. The article says, “The mission of many orders has become simply caring for their aging populations as they sell properties and consolidate with others.” I beg to differ. We always have and always will live our mission AND care for our sisters. There is nothing new about caring for aging populations, selling property, collaborating, and combining congregations. What is new is that we have such large numbers right now because of the major influx from the early- to mid-1900s. We have to be a bit more creative perhaps in how we care for our sisters and deal with our assets, but other than that, we remain vibrant.

5. What the heck is this?

For a time, the life of Catholic religious orders became about social justice issues, psychological issues, peace studies, interreligious dialogue, the ecology movement—everything and anything, seemingly, except the central proposition: that one can know a loving God and be transformed.

I am deeply offended by this statement. It reveals the author’s lack of understanding about consecrated life and about this period of history in the Catholic Church. Read the Vatican II Church Documents, spend time with religious who lived through this time period, and then perhaps you will understand that religious have been and will continue to be centered around a life and mission based on being in relationship with a loving God and working towards the transformation of ourselves and the world.

6. The jump from discussing consecrated life through Vatican II to the recent foundation of Clear Creek Monastery suggests that only newer communities are faithful to the Church and attractive to young people. While the growth in the monastery is great, the newer communities have not stood the test of time to see if young people stay, how new communities will grow and change as all religious communities before them have. It is exciting to see newer communities and the ways the Holy Spirit continues to inspire people. But make no mistake, the Holy Spirit is alive and well in established religious communities who continue to live out their charism according to what Vatican II called the “signs of the times”.

Well, that’s my two cents (or three) on the article.

Your thoughts?