Domincan Nuns' Habit

[Luigi]

http://www.monialesop.org/

The March 14th entry of the Summit Dominican's blog features a discussion of the habits of Dominican nuns & friars. I say brief, but it was still too long to post here. Besides, there are some interesting and very old illustrations on the site.

[TradMom]

+Praised be Jesus Christ!

I must say something and with charity in mind, cannot quite figure out how to write it without being disrespectful or too judgmental.

However, love of Holy Mother Church supersedes all else. This blog has long been a disappointment to me and as a result, I do not visit it (normally). I did today after reading Luigi's post. Finding pictures on the internet of the nuns "playing around" with their archival items - especially a relic of Pius XII - is too much for me. Yes, I am truly a "traditional mother" and within that comes a deep respect for the traditions and practices of our Church. While those particular nuns do not use the discipline, many communities do, with reverence and piety. I don't find it amusing to make fun of those items or those practices. Considering the many misunderstandings our Church must face in today's climate, I find it completely out of line to post pictures like this on the internet. I am horrified that a relic - of a candidate for sainthood - no less - would be treated with such disrespect and frivolity. And to make these pictures available for the entire world!? DURING LENT?!

Just for the record, I find many blogs of cloistered/contemplative nuns (and monks) to be very holy and uplifting. This, however, I find upsetting and truly irreverent.

I will continue to pray for this community. May their blog one day bring glory and grace to the beauty of traditional cloistered contemplative life.

Pax,
TradMom

[Tridenteen]

JMJ
I am inclined to agree with TradMom. The playing with the relic of the Pope was disturbing. My family has part of Pope Leo's collar, and it is always treated very respectfully. I was a bit saddened to see the disregard for it.

[DameAgnes]

[quote name='Tridenteen' date='16 March 2010 - 01:26 PM' timestamp='1268764017' post='2074051']
JMJ
I am inclined to agree with TradMom. The playing with the relic of the Pope was disturbing. My family has part of Pope Leo's collar, and it is always treated very respectfully. I was a bit saddened to see the disregard for it.
[/quote]

I'm inclined -in all charity- to respectfully disagree.

It's perfectly fair to have a preference as to what one prefers to see in a monastery blog. But I think when we accuse faithful nuns who are examining archival items as "playing around," we cross a line. Is the nun demonstrating how the cap is worn prancing around with it? No. She's just showing it. Are the nuns with the disciplines playing with them? No. They're looking at them and getting a sense of what nuns before them did. Are the nuns examining the spikes "playing" with them? They are not.

I saw noone "playing around" with the disciplines, or the second-class relic of a holy man; it looked to me like the Sister was simply demonstrating how the skullcap would be worn. They were LOOKING at the disciplines, and with great interest, it seemed to me. Also, if you look at the expressions of the sisters (particularly Sr. Joseph Maria who is always smiling) you see that they are not "playing" with the spikes that are replicas of those that impaled Our Lord. They are quite properly distressed, and wondering about the whole act of using them on Him.

I saw no one playing, and I saw no disrespect being show to any of the things in their archives. I suspect that people see what they WANT to see, and when it comes to this particular monastery, and this particular novitiate, some PM'ers see only negatives. It seems to me that "charity" involves thinking the best, not the worst, of people -particularly when you are interpreting pictures and are not present at something.

There is nothing at all wrong with being a traditionalist; there is much good to be said about it. But it seems to me that sitting in judgment of a monastery full of women who have given their lives to prayer and worship for the rest of us, and which seems extremely faithful to their charism, simply because they (with permission, just like our friend Indwelling Trinity) "break enclosure" too much for some, or because they dare to go sledding, or examine archival disciplines without a "suitable" disposition (I wonder what that would be, actually? Would it be better if they were weeping and on their knees, than standing and looking with horror at the spikes?) lacks charity and comes down as a supreme judgmentalism.

I know there have been lengthy arguments (and they are arguments worth having) about how much a monastic blog should or should not share of its life. That decision is left up to each monastery. Some blogs are updated only to show newsletters; others are updated regularly to announce news, ask for prayers and share a bit of what monastic life in their community is. Some remain mostly quiet during Lent, some use Lent as a time to discuss penitential practices past or present. I think it all serves the Lord, and the Holy Spirit will use them as he sees fit.

Summit seems to be attracting, not repelling vocations, and it takes all kinds of houses to suit all kinds of nuns. Can we be positive, rather than negative, in our charity?

It is not possible for everyone to always like everyone else, but it's one thing to not like a house or a person, and another to engage in near-slander of them. These are Brides of Christ. To slander them by believing the worst, rather than the best of them, seems directly opposed to the name "charity."

Edited March 16, 2010 by DameAgnes

[Tridenteen]

[quote name='DameAgnes' date='16 March 2010 - 01:49 PM' timestamp='1268765360' post='2074063']
I'm inclined -in all charity- to respectfully disagree.

It's perfectly fair to have a preference as to what one prefers to see in a monastery blog. But I think when we accuse faithful nuns who are examining archival items as "playing around," we cross a line. Is the nun demonstrating how the cap is worn prancing around with it? No. She's just showing it. Are the nuns with the disciplines playing with them? No. They're looking at them and getting a sense of what nuns before them did. Are the nuns examining the spikes "playing" with them? They are not.

I saw noone "playing around" with the disciplines, or the second-class relic of a holy man; it looked to me like the Sister was simply demonstrating how the skullcap would be worn. They were LOOKING at the disciplines, and with great interest, it seemed to me. Also, if you look at the expressions of the sisters (particularly Sr. Joseph Maria who is always smiling) you see that they are not "playing" with the spikes that are replicas of those that impaled Our Lord. They are quite properly distressed, and wondering about the whole act of using them on Him.

I saw no one playing, and I saw no disrespect being show to any of the things in their archives. I suspect that people see what they WANT to see, and when it comes to this particular monastery, and this particular novitiate, some PM'ers see only negatives. It seems to me that "charity" involves thinking the best, not the worst, of people -particularly when you are interpreting pictures and are not present at something.

There is nothing at all wrong with being a traditionalist; there is much good to be said about it. But it seems to me that sitting in judgment of a monastery full of women who have given their lives to prayer and worship for the rest of us, and which seems extremely faithful to their charism, simply because they (with permission, just like our friend Indwelling Trinity) "break enclosure" too much for some, or because they dare to go sledding, or examine archival disciplines without a "suitable" disposition (I wonder what that would be, actually? Would it be better if they were weeping and on their knees, than standing and looking with horror at the spikes?) lacks charity and comes down as a supreme judgmentalism.

I know there have been lengthy arguments (and they are arguments worth having) about how much a monastic blog should or should not share of its life. That decision is left up to each monastery. Some blogs are updated only to show newsletters; others are updated regularly to announce news, ask for prayers and share a bit of what monastic life in their community is. Some remain mostly quiet during Lent, some use Lent as a time to discuss penitential practices past or present. I think it all serves the Lord, and the Holy Spirit will use them as he sees fit.

Summit seems to be attracting, not repelling vocations, and it takes all kinds of houses to suit all kinds of nuns. Can we be positive, rather than negative, in our charity?

It is not possible for everyone to always like everyone else, but it's one thing to not like a house or a person, and another to engage in near-slander of them. These are Brides of Christ. To slander them by believing the worst, rather than the best of them, seems directly opposed to the name "charity."
[/quote]



JMJ
Dame Agnes,
I never said anyhting as to how the nuns reacted around the discipline instruments. I shared their reaction. I just didn't like how they treated the Pope's zhuccetto. I reguraly read their blog, and like it a lot. I just don't like the way they were handling the relic. I am sitting in judgement of no one, although that phrase seems to be used alot whenever someone expresses an opinion. I was expressing the opinion that I didn't like the way they were handling the relic. Everything else, I thought was funny, and thoroughly enjoyed the blo post.

[kavalamyself]

I just looked at it. Dame Agnes, I don't think we are believing the worst when we are looking at those pictures because that one photo says it all (of the nun with the Pope's zucchetto on). I was in a convent as most of you know and it was cloistered. We had a relic room and there is no way we would have been allowed to "try on" any of the stuff (or even touch it in a casual manner). All of the items from the foundress were considered to be relics and we had a practice of kissing each item on certain dates (like our foundation day) and praying for her soul and her companions, etc. I definitely ended up having problems there and I left (obviously) but they were personal issues and not on the internet. I think the Summits could have shown the items because they are interesting without showing the nuns' handling them or reacting to them - also in my Monastery we did use "the discipline" and to us it was considered a sacramental and very sacred. I know from very personal experience that just because someone is a nun doesn't mean that they are automatically holy or have great judgment.

[praxedes]

Judging and having an opinion are two very different things. It is refreshing to visit a place where conflicting views may be shared in peace and charity. All points well taken.

Pax,
Praxedes

[tnavarro61]

[quote name='DameAgnes' date='17 March 2010 - 03:49 AM' timestamp='1268765360' post='2074063']
I'm inclined -in all charity- to respectfully disagree.

It's perfectly fair to have a preference as to what one prefers to see in a monastery blog. But I think when we accuse faithful nuns who are examining archival items as "playing around," we cross a line. Is the nun demonstrating how the cap is worn prancing around with it? No. She's just showing it. Are the nuns with the disciplines playing with them? No. They're looking at them and getting a sense of what nuns before them did. Are the nuns examining the spikes "playing" with them? They are not.

I saw noone "playing around" with the disciplines, or the second-class relic of a holy man; it looked to me like the Sister was simply demonstrating how the skullcap would be worn. They were LOOKING at the disciplines, and with great interest, it seemed to me. Also, if you look at the expressions of the sisters (particularly Sr. Joseph Maria who is always smiling) you see that they are not "playing" with the spikes that are replicas of those that impaled Our Lord. They are quite properly distressed, and wondering about the whole act of using them on Him.

I saw no one playing, and I saw no disrespect being show to any of the things in their archives. I suspect that people see what they WANT to see, and when it comes to this particular monastery, and this particular novitiate, some PM'ers see only negatives. It seems to me that "charity" involves thinking the best, not the worst, of people -particularly when you are interpreting pictures and are not present at something.

There is nothing at all wrong with being a traditionalist; there is much good to be said about it. But it seems to me that sitting in judgment of a monastery full of women who have given their lives to prayer and worship for the rest of us, and which seems extremely faithful to their charism, simply because they (with permission, just like our friend Indwelling Trinity) "break enclosure" too much for some, or because they dare to go sledding, or examine archival disciplines without a "suitable" disposition (I wonder what that would be, actually? Would it be better if they were weeping and on their knees, than standing and looking with horror at the spikes?) lacks charity and comes down as a supreme judgmentalism.

I know there have been lengthy arguments (and they are arguments worth having) about how much a monastic blog should or should not share of its life. That decision is left up to each monastery. Some blogs are updated only to show newsletters; others are updated regularly to announce news, ask for prayers and share a bit of what monastic life in their community is. Some remain mostly quiet during Lent, some use Lent as a time to discuss penitential practices past or present. I think it all serves the Lord, and the Holy Spirit will use them as he sees fit.

Summit seems to be attracting, not repelling vocations, and it takes all kinds of houses to suit all kinds of nuns. Can we be positive, rather than negative, in our charity?

It is not possible for everyone to always like everyone else, but it's one thing to not like a house or a person, and another to engage in near-slander of them. These are Brides of Christ. To slander them by believing the worst, rather than the best of them, seems directly opposed to the name "charity."
[/quote]

got to agree with you. they are not fooling with these things, nor making fun of them.

[Luigi]

I don't get it, I've never gotten it, and I guess I'll never get it!

There are and have been numerous threads on this board about nuns' habits, habited dolls, wimples vs. guimpes, veils and their length, and the effects each or any have on holiness & the expression thereof. All of which I personally consider at least superficial and possibly downright vain.

But I try to be supportive by posting a link with information about habits, for those who are interested, and...

Instead of any discussion about habits, the discussion hangs a sharp right turn and tackles nuns on the Internet, how much fun is permissible in a monastery, the handling of relics, and the facial expression of postulants.

I don't get it, I've never gotten it, and I guess I'll never get it.

[tnavarro61]

[quote name='Luigi' date='17 March 2010 - 01:29 PM' timestamp='1268800170' post='2074467']
I don't get it, I've never gotten it, and I guess I'll never get it!

There are and have been numerous threads on this board about nuns' habits, habited dolls, wimples vs. guimpes, veils and their length, and the effects each or any have on holiness & the expression thereof. All of which I personally consider at least superficial and possibly downright vain.

But I try to be supportive by posting a link with information about habits, for those who are interested, and...

Instead of any discussion about habits, the discussion hangs a sharp right turn and tackles nuns on the Internet, how much fun is permissible in a monastery, the handling of relics, and the facial expression of postulants.

I don't get it, I've never gotten it, and I guess I'll never get it.
[/quote]
oops sorry for the off topics! i thought we were in a monastic field trip! sorry sorry!

[Luigi]

[quote name='tnavarro61' date='17 March 2010 - 12:53 AM' timestamp='1268801597' post='2074475']
oops sorry for the off topics! i thought we were in a monastic field trip! sorry sorry!
[/quote]
No, man, it's okay - people can talk about whatever they want to talk about. I'm just saying I can't figure out what people want to talk about.

[Cherie]

[quote name='TradMom' date='16 March 2010 - 02:13 PM' timestamp='1268763180' post='2074042']
+Praised be Jesus Christ!

I must say something and with charity in mind, cannot quite figure out how to write it without being disrespectful or too judgmental.

However, love of Holy Mother Church supersedes all else. This blog has long been a disappointment to me and as a result, I do not visit it (normally). I did today after reading Luigi's post. Finding pictures on the internet of the nuns "playing around" with their archival items - especially a relic of Pius XII - is too much for me. Yes, I am truly a "traditional mother" and within that comes a deep respect for the traditions and practices of our Church. While those particular nuns do not use the discipline, many communities do, with reverence and piety. I don't find it amusing to make fun of those items or those practices. Considering the many misunderstandings our Church must face in today's climate, I find it completely out of line to post pictures like this on the internet. I am horrified that a relic - of a candidate for sainthood - no less - would be treated with such disrespect and frivolity. And to make these pictures available for the entire world!? DURING LENT?!

Just for the record, I find many blogs of cloistered/contemplative nuns (and monks) to be very holy and uplifting. This, however, I find upsetting and truly irreverent.

I will continue to pray for this community. May their blog one day bring glory and grace to the beauty of traditional cloistered contemplative life.

Pax,
TradMom
[/quote]

I must admit that I understand very much where you're coming from.

When I was in religious life, religious decorum was something we took very seriously, and something in which we differed from many other communities. For example, the Sisters were never to sit on the floor, as it was considered bad decorum for a consecrated woman to sit on the floor. I remember one instance in which we were with many other communities at a common gathering for teens, and we were in a gymnasium. Other Sisters from these well-known communities sat with the kids on the gym floor -- and out of charity and a desire not to set ourselves apart as "self-righteous," we did, too -- but it was hard for us since we had always been taught never to do that. Other communities would say it actually is a form of humility to be able to sit on the floor -- and to a degree, I certainly agree. But it wasn't part of the traditional religious decorum, and that's what we were taught.

Our community would never have taken pictures of us going through old corporal penitential devices, and especially not to post them on the internet. It would lead to discussions about our community that we would rather not be public. In a way, people would have considered us somewhat "secretive" - but that was to convey the mystery of consecrated life, that the consecrated life is something precious, sacred, and private. We were taught that charity always came first (we never should "put off" anyone by our behavior) but that we were to keep matters of the community with the community, period.

I suppose what it boils down to is simply two different veins of thought on the subject. I know many communities who regularly use the internet for correspondence (our community had a simple website, but a "blog" is something we never would have considered) and some who do things that strike me as somewhat frivolous (I'm not saying I'm judging it as being frivolous, I'm just saying it sometimes strikes me as so--I'm glad to be able to know the difference between reality and my own perceptions, which are sometimes colored by other things. Remember, I come from a background in which religious decorum was of the utmost importance.)

I guess I'm just saying TradMom I certainly understand where you're coming from. I appreciated the religious decorum we were taught - it taught us how to be reverent in situations that before I entered religious life, I never would have considered there a need to be reverent. And we all must admit, there is a great lack of reverence in society today -- take a look at young people going to receive Our Lord in Holy Communion at most typical Catholic Churches! So, I see the need for that. I try not to judge communities, especially when I see things from religious that strike me as odd -- after all, they ARE religious men and women!! But I preferred our community's line of thinking on that. It just fit me better, I guess.

[Lilllabettt]

[quote name='CherieMadame' date='17 March 2010 - 10:36 AM' timestamp='1268832973' post='2074529']
I suppose what it boils down to is simply two different veins of thought on the subject.
[/quote]


I think being concerned about religious decorum is a good idea because:

1. The laity are easily scandalized
2. there's that painful clash that happens when someone dignified (a religious) is juxtaposed doing something undignified (the Macarena)

on the other hand, some Communities have a charism of being "with" the laity in a different way. So they might not have that emphasis on a special "religious" kind of decorum ... but more on proper Christian decorum ...

Hmmm its interesting ...

[brightsadness]

I know a Sister who is in a habit and it is her responsibility to do the grocery shopping for her local community. She once told me that she shops in another part of town to avoid scandalizing people. I never understood why, as they are very frugal, until now.

[Lilllabettt]

[quote name='brightsadness' date='17 March 2010 - 04:37 PM' timestamp='1268854662' post='2074744']
I know a Sister who is in a habit and it is her responsibility to do the grocery shopping for her local community. She once told me that she shops in another part of town to avoid scandalizing people. I never understood why, as they are very frugal, until now.
[/quote]


The thing is, you never know what will set people off. Like if shrimp was on sale, and she bought shrimp, and somebody was scandalized by how "well" they were eating ... rash judgment is a widespread problem nowadays; which is why religious are so careful ...