Talk:Lay brother

Untitled 2005
My understanding was that post Vatican II, the Lay Brotherhood was essentially eliminated as a seperate vocation; while there are a few 'leftovers' around, no new lay brothers are accepted, the roles that they previously filled being passed either to ordinary monks or to the general lay community. The article states that there are lay brothers present in every branch of Catholic monasticism as though it were current practice; I think that this may be a hold-over from outdated text incorporated from the public domain Catholic encyclopedia. Would anyone care to clarify this? --Clay Collier 11:45, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Untitled 2007
The info printed in this article is from the 1913 edition of the Catholic Encyclopedia and is VERY outdated! The majority of verbs in the present tense need to be changed to the past tense, in order to express that lay brothers and lay sisters were a part of past history. Religious Brothers do still exist, even entire orders (non-ordained male religious), but this article does not explain their unique vocation. A Brother is no longer viewed as some type of second class manual worker, or someone who failed his studies for the priesthood. This article desperately needs to be revised! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.131.5.129 (talk) 00:27, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Untitled 2008
--Punahou academy? Huh? Can someone with more knowledge check if this is an act of vandalism? It doesn't sound right to me.87.198.195.156 (talk) 18:35, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Eastern Orthodoxy?
The article states that the institution of lay brotherhood exists in Eastern Orthodoxy as well as Roman Catholicism, but does not actually discuss examples of the former. And I am not aware of any such distinction in Orthodox monasticism, at least not formally, though at least one scholar think that the distinction between the Small Habit and the Great Habit was developed in part to reflect some such distinction in practice (Karl Holl, Enthusiasmus und Bussgewalt beim griechischen Mönchtum, a classic work but dated -- late ninetheenth century). --Horatio325 (talk) 11:01, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Same thing as religious brother
This page shouldn't exist. It only cited one source, from more than a century ago, that used outdated terminology in reference to what is today usually called a religious brother. That page already exists and has more or less the same information contained in this article. My deletion tag was opposed, so I've added a number of sources to the lede that show there is no distinction in modern terminology between lay brothers and religious brothers. natemup (talk) 12:03, 3 September 2022 (UTC)