FRATERNITY MEETING
Several times recently, I have been
asked about commitment to Fraternity meetings, specifically to the monthly
meeting.
When asked questions like this, I
look for the answers first in the SFO Rule and General Constitutions, since
these are the authoritative sources that define the secular Franciscan way of
life. Some interpret this approach as legalism. However, the Rule and
Constitutions provide a solid foundation on which to build an answer.
Article 24 of the Rule states: “To
foster communion among members, the council should organize regular and
frequent meetings of the community ... and encourage everyone to a life of
fraternity.” The General Constitutions speak of “Participation in the Life of the
Fraternity.” Article 53.1 fills out the Rule: “The fraternity must offer to its
members opportunities for coming together and collaborating through meetings to
be held with as great a frequency as allowed by the situation and with the
involvement of all its members.”
Neither the Rule nor the
Constitutions specify a “monthly” meeting. Rather, they speak of “regular and
frequent meetings”, “with as great a frequency as allowed by the situation.”
Where, then, did we get the idea of the “monthly” meeting?
The rule for penitents of 1221, Memoriale propositi, states: “All the
brothers and sisters of a local fraternity should come together once a month to
assist at Mass” (Chapter VII, 1). The Rule of Nicholas IV, Supra montem, states: “Let all the healthy brother and sisters of each city or place ...
assemble each month in the church or place, in which, and/or to which the
ministers have taken care to point out, to hear Solemn Mass there” (Chapter
XIII). These directives are reflected in the present General Constitutions in
Article 53.2: “The fraternity should come together periodically, also as an
ecclesial community to celebrate the Eucharist in a climate that strengthens
the fraternal bond...”
Leo XIII’s Rule of 1883 simplified
and minimalized the previous rule. Misericors
Dei Filius, states: “Let them attend the monthly meetings called by the
Prefect” (Art.11). This is where we got the idea of a “monthly” meeting. We
have seen that this idea was not adopted by Paul VI in his Rule of 1978, Seraphicus Patriarcha. The present Rule
advocates “regular and frequent meetings”.
The National Fraternity of Oceania
is one of the few that maintains the Leonine structure of the monthly meeting.
Most have adopted the Pauline structure and meet more often than once a month.
They have learnt that fraternity life cannot thrive on a monthly meeting but
needs more frequent gatherings. Although this is not possible for many local
Fraternities whose members are gathered from wide areas, it is possible for
some and is worth considering.
However, my inquirers are concerned
about the commitment of the members to the “monthly” meetings of their
Fraternity. They have made a reasonable effort to bring their records up to
date by offering non-active members the options of returning to meetings, or
applying for a transfer to another more conveniently located Fraternity, or
applying for a definitive withdrawal.
They haven’t overlooked the National
Statutes regarding justifiably absent members: “The councils of fraternities
with members who are unable to participate actively in fraternity life shall
make provisions for the unity and care of these brothers and sisters... (Art.
8.5.1). They are concerned rather with the unjustifiably absent members (Art. 8.5.2).
First of all, it is important to
keep an accurate record of attendance at meetings.
Most non-active members do not
warrant dismissal, which is only for “serious causes, provided they are
external, imputable, and juridically proven” (Gen.Const. 58.2). At most, they
would be open to suspension owing to “the repeated and prolonged default in the
obligations of the life of the fraternity” (Gen.Const. 56.3). Suspension
“involves exclusion from the meetings and activities of the fraternity,
including the right to active and passive voice, but membership in the Order
itself is not affected.”
The most important clause here is
exclusion from voting. A list of active members should be drawn up before an
election. If any non-active persons present themselves at an election expecting
to have active or passive voice, then the Minister and another Council member
together should speak to the person privately before the election. If the
person insists on voting, that vote is not counted. The Council has serious reason
for suspending that person, but should seek competent civil legal advice before
proceeding with suspension. The Council could decide prudently not to take
action.
But if non-active members present no
problems by their non-attendance then I would advise that nothing more be done
about them after three reminder notices, but to keep a record of non-active
members.
Does this qualify as a “spiritual”
message? When we consider that fraternal life is essential to any form of
Franciscan life, and that the commitment of the members is essential to the
life of the SFO local Fraternity, then we are certainly concerned about the
spiritual life.
It is the spirit of the fraternity
members that builds the appropriate structures to express themselves as a local
Fraternity, and also as a regional and a national fraternity. How often do they
need to meet in order to create and experience a genuine fraternity life? The
answer will differ “as allowed by the situation” (Gen.Const. 53.1). Some may
have to be satisfied with the structure of the “monthly” meeting and may find
even that much a big effort. Some other Fraternities already meet more
frequently because they have felt the need to do so. Some have no difficulty
meeting as Secular Franciscans weekly because they all attend the same parish
church and get together afterwards. But those who think that a monthly meeting
for an hour or so is all there is to SFO fraternal life are sadly missing out.
Carl Schafer OFM
National Assistant SFO –