Last night discussing the themes for the Brothers' Congress with Fr Maliekal, he made a very insightful observation when he said that he was in a way waging a crusade a few years ago to retain the title 'lay brothers' for Salesian Brothers. He said everyone wanted to do away with that title altogether.
It then struck me that we Brothers may be taking shunning the tag of 'lay' to take shelter in the 'religious' dimension and pretend to be religious, while the fact is that we were truly meant to be a balanced mixture of both! The institutional comfort and safety of the 'religious' tag seems too seductive to resist. And what's more, even under that roof, we still claim for a separate portion! ... a share in that pie! Why not claim for a pie in the 'lay' dimension??
Hence I immediately made it a point to put in into the Congress as one of the major points for discussion: redeeming or resurrecting the lay dimension of our vocation.
It then struck me that we Brothers may be taking shunning the tag of 'lay' to take shelter in the 'religious' dimension and pretend to be religious, while the fact is that we were truly meant to be a balanced mixture of both! The institutional comfort and safety of the 'religious' tag seems too seductive to resist. And what's more, even under that roof, we still claim for a separate portion! ... a share in that pie! Why not claim for a pie in the 'lay' dimension??
Hence I immediately made it a point to put in into the Congress as one of the major points for discussion: redeeming or resurrecting the lay dimension of our vocation.
but Casa, you ARE religious brothers in that you live and conform to all the conventions and institutional so-on and so-forths. If you were lay, wouldn't you then be out in the world with the rest of the laity? And you would live like the laity- working in institutions perhaps but not living in them.
ReplyDeleteThe way the brothers are now, it seems to be me that they are religious brothers and not lay brothers. Since I have no idea what the brothers were supposed to be before they became 'religious', what would be the difference if you did resurrect the lay dimension?
Well, it is true that we are 'religious' Brothers but perhaps what I meant is that we have become too institutionalized or sought undue comfort and shelter within the 'religious' world...
DeleteMay also be a sort of defense mechanism, to survive ...??!!
If not a real 'walking out' of the religious house, at least an awareness that we needn't tuck in our tails and heads, while being inside and certainly not make tall claims for rights and liberties... at least that would be quite an achievement.
hmm. ok.
Deletei guess it's a rather expected development because all institutionalisation will breed this behaviour. I think it also happens in the laity as well :D whenever we get into any particular kind of job or relationship or tradition. Too much security might not be useful for us to grow-- like osho says about the seed and the plant.
it's such a conundrum. you institutionalise things to preserve them and in the process, kill them. Because that thing was effective only as long as it was alive and with the capability/freedom to respond to contexts. A Jesus would not have been possible in any one institution. Many such institutions together would/could have bred him but not contain him.
ReplyDelete