Is there a danger to joining newer communities?

[Carson]

I'm talking communities that have older members but not elderly ones that need extra support. So maybe in the last 40 years? 

Examples would be The Sisters of Life, The Fransiscan Sisters of the Penance of the Sorrowful Mother, The Dominican Sisters of Mary, Mother of the Eucharist, etc.

I love these communities but I want to be careful. Any insight?

[Nunsuch]

Just my opinion: I think that the ones you cite have proven themselves by being around for awhile with a number of members who have persisted in perpetual vows for some time. They have a relatively large number of members, a solid formation program, and consistency.  The Franciscan Sisters of the Penance of the Sorrowful Mother are perhaps the smallest of these, but seem to have demonstrated stability.  I would be more wary of smaller groups that are VERY new (I mean with just a very small number of members), simply because their persistence is more in doubt. 

Of course, every community starts small, so that is not to be critical of the very new, very small ones.  But there is risk. 

[veritasluxmea]

Depends on the community. There's a difference between communities started within the past five years vs ten years vs forty. And nothing is guaranteed in religious life. I think it depends on the person too- someone with the right personality and maturity to handle the formation of a new charism. So be aware of what you're getting into and use a lot of wisdom and discernment

[A Yearning Heart]

I agree with Nunsense and Veritasluxmea. Good thoughts.

My thought is that the communities listed, even though examples, have different charisms. Rather than look at the size or age of a community first, my thought would be to consider what charism I was drawn to. That won't necessarily mean a smaller or newer community, but can identify a broad direction towards, say, Franciscan or Dominican communities that could then be explored further. Discussion with a director, prayer, amd making contact with communities would help narrow down possible communities. That process would also clarify if one was being called to a newer community or a more established one, and then it wouldn't be an undiscerned 'risk', but one where you'd know there'd be a good chance you'd fit, were invited by the community to try, and one where you'd be able and willing to go.

 

[MarysLittleFlower]

I would for sure look at formation and how many Sisters who have entered have stayed. There are always people who try and decide its not their vocation, but if theres a much larger percentage of such people compared to other conmunities , that could mean a problem in the community itself. I'm not aware of all the communities you mentioned but the Sisters of Life and Sisters of Mary Mother of the Eucharist are both new-ish yet thriving with many young joyful Sisters! 

Edited January 1, 2016 by MarysLittleFlower

[vee]

Ive always found this list of questions extremely helpful, Ive even printed it off and taken it with me on convent visits, or simply asked myself these questions even to this day.  Not that others dont have good points in that thread but her answer is epic.

Scroll down to trad mom's post. 

http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/topic/77767-going-on-a-nun-run/

 

Edited January 1, 2016 by vee
typos

[Sister Leticia]

Danger is a strong word - I would simply say caution needs to be used. Firstly, I'd say anyone feeling attracted to a new community (and by this I mean very new) needs to ask themselves a few questions. For example:

What exactly do you find more attractive about joining a new community rather than an established one? Do you have the inner stamina and resources to be part of a group whose current and future existence, finances, identity, status within the Church etc could be precarious?

I once knew someone who spent some time with a very new community. She was attracted by the idea of "newness" and being a pioneer. But she discovered this wasn't right for her. She felt the foundress was making things up as she went along - and to a certain extent, that's precisely what she would have been doing, as the community was still finding its feet and writing its documents. They were also having lots of teething problems, as all new groups do. This young woman realised she needed something more stable, and eventually joined a more established congregation.

Then there are questions about the community itself. Why exactly was it founded? Is it doing something new or different or meeting a specific, unmet need? What exactly is its spirituality, charism and mission? I know these are things which can evolve over time, but how clear does it all seem? (especially if the community has already been around several years) Do the spirituality and charism speak to your heart and why?

As MLF has suggested, look at numbers entering and leaving. How does the community do discernment and pre-entry? How many leave after only a short time v how many stay? Actual numbers aren't always an accurate indicator, as some might get more publicity or help than others, but if a community is 10 or more years old and still only has 2 or 3 members, it's worth wondering why.

And what if numbers don't increase (or they decrease)? - it's one thing to join a new community of 5, with the hope of more vocations, but try and imagine how you'd feel making perpetual vows several years later if there are still only 5 - or 4.

Finally (for now!), if they have a website take a good, critical look at it - maybe with a more sceptical friend. How clear are they about the things that matter and are there things they gloss over? Does it leave you with lots of unanswered questions? Is there a disproportionate amount of space dedicated to the founder? (I've seen some sites where I've learnt all about the foundress or founder but know very little about the rest of the group!)

That's all for now!

[Benedictus]

There's always an element of risk when thinking about entering religious life, pretty much like most things. There may well be more caution and discernment needed when considering a new community. However, similar issues and challenges arise in terms of established communities now as they face different challenges and often uncertainty too. There are issues of age demographics, possible mergers or closure, keeping a vocation and vision as a younger religious in an older congregation etc. Different matters will vary depending on the institute but it's likely something like this will come up over the next twenty years or so for most of them, regardless of how established or big they are.

An established community can be difficult because there is often a core number who were formed in a specific way of visioning the world. I have different views on things compared, as an example, some religious prests formed in the late 60's  and early 1970's. A new group can aviod some of this but they then face different problems.

I found it helpful to think through all the issues and factors they could happen, talk about those with an SD and (at least in part) with certain members of the institute. You have to happy to think you could adapt and grow in situations that may be difficult or challenging. You need to be happy there is a core part of you that is content with any situation you'll face as a religious and this means being open to the unknown.

[bardegaulois]

18 hours ago, Carson said:

I'm talking communities that have older members but not elderly ones that need extra support. So maybe in the last 40 years? 

Examples would be The Sisters of Life, The Fransiscan Sisters of the Penance of the Sorrowful Mother, The Dominican Sisters of Mary, Mother of the Eucharist, etc.

I love these communities but I want to be careful. Any insight?

This is a very good question. I'd think the big question one should ask is, how stable is this community? Do they have a record of supporting themselves financially and do they have the necessary personnel to fill all the functions required in their rule and constitutions? Is their novitiate a revolving door or do a good number of their novices and postulants go on to profess vows?

I'd ask this of any community really, even those that have been established for a long time. Some of these are now very troubled with the effects of their members' aging and few to no vocations in recent decades. It's in many ways good to be very pragmatic when considering such things and also always to heed the counsel of a spiritual director as well.

[Carson]

Thank you so much, everyone! All of your advice is very helpful!

[TheresaThoma]

I wouldn't say it is dangerous but caution should be used. If we all only entered established communities then there would never be new charisms. However not all new communities are healthy and have a true charism.

Something else to keep in mind is see what he community's relationship with the local bishop is. 

[Nunsuch]

I once wrote an article on the over-use of the term "charism." Most modern apostolic congregations didn't have a charism at their founding, and probably most today don't, either. Most in the 19th century were founded instrumentally: to teach Lithuanian immigrant children, to open a hospital in a town without one, "Father couldn't find teaching sisters to come to his parish so he decided to make his own," etc.  That may be nice, but it's not charismic. Some DEVELOP charisms over time. I like the term "deep story"--the spirit and meaning of a congregation that develops over time, and is not due to one person, but to communal spiritual insight and contributions. 

God still acts, and so the emergence of new charisms and deep stories can of course still happen. But not every group has one. Also, not every group is intended to exist forever. What happens when there are no more Lithuanian immigrants? If they haven't developed a spiritual purpose beyond the instrumental, persistence may not be warranted. 

[Julie]

14 minutes ago, Nunsuch said:

I once wrote an article on the over-use of the term "charism." Most modern apostolic congregations didn't have a charism at their founding, and probably most today don't, either. Most in the 19th century were founded instrumentally: to teach Lithuanian immigrant children, to open a hospital in a town without one, "Father couldn't find teaching sisters to come to his parish so he decided to make his own," etc.  That may be nice, but it's not charismic. Some DEVELOP charisms over time. I like the term "deep story"--the spirit and meaning of a congregation that develops over time, and is not due to one person, but to communal spiritual insight and contributions. 

God still acts, and so the emergence of new charisms and deep stories can of course still happen. But not every group has one. Also, not every group is intended to exist forever. What happens when there are no more Lithuanian immigrants? If they haven't developed a spiritual purpose beyond the instrumental, persistence may not be warranted. 

That's a good point. It's helpful, since I've long been confused by congregations that meet slightly different needs (so people talk about them having different charisms) but don't seem to have different charisms. A sort of separation between being and doing...

[Feankie]

I would urge caution as well.  Some of the new communities (those founded in the past 7 years or so) that seem to be growing rather rapidly have no "track record" on which to make a educated decision.  And yes, a good distinction is between "being" and "doing".  A strong formation program is also a must.  I fear some newer communities might focus on gaining numbers rather that the develop of the Sisters/Nuns.

[Nunsuch]

3 hours ago, Francis Clare said:

I would urge caution as well.  Some of the new communities (those founded in the past 7 years or so) that seem to be growing rather rapidly have no "track record" on which to make a educated decision.  And yes, a good distinction is between "being" and "doing".  A strong formation program is also a must.  I fear some newer communities might focus on gaining numbers rather that the develop of the Sisters/Nuns.

Yes. I think another important basis for distinction is that between the qualitative and the quantitative. I've given a number of talks to religious congregations of women, as well as to other audiences of sisters. I first ask them what they consider the most "successful" period of their history. They often answer: when they had tons of vocations, new schools (or other missions) opening every year, etc. Then I ask, what was the  most *inspiring* period of your history. Usually they answer: when we just had a handful of members, were very poor, and suffering. But we had a vision.... THAT is the difference between quantity and quality. For religious the definition of success should always be qualitative. But that requires charism/deep story--not just numbers.