The Nuns' Story - A Hypothetical

[Antigonos]

It is worth remembering that Sister Luke entered in 1927, and left in the middle of the Second World War, in 1943. In the book it is mentioned that her family had suffered severely during the German occupation in the First World War, and, in both the book and the movie it's mentioned that her father was killed when a column of refugees he was helping was strafed by the Nazis. It is quite possible that had the war not occurred she would never have left--in spite of her problems with obedience, it was her inability to reconcile her feelings toward the Germans with her religious conscience that provoked the crisis.

[b][i]Everything[/i][/b] was very different then. She did enter an order devoted to nursing and teaching, but she particularly wanted to serve in the order's African missions, even though she knew the order ran a number of institutions in Belgium and that she was likely to be assigned to one of them. She was a very devout Catholic, but it has to be remembered, also, that in Europe at the time, nearly all professional nurses were religious. Apart from England, thanks to Florence Nightingale, which began training secular women as nurses in the 19th century, secular professional nursing really only got going in Europe during and after WWII. So it was logical for a devout woman to choose to be a nun if she wanted to do nursing.

[BarbTherese]

[quote name='nunsense' timestamp='1324515735' post='2355539']
I'm not sure about this one any more, after reading Sr Marie's post about trying to balance the apostolic life with the monastic one. Perhaps the timing was just wrong for Sr Luke because it was in the days when they had to live a monastic life while doing an apostolic mission, also at a time when the world was being torn apart. Maybe she could have made it if she were trying today. But, at least we all were able to be inspired and maybe even learn some things from her life story.
[/quote]

Perhaps I worded poorly : "the fact that in active communities very often had a monastic schedule of prayer and spiritual practices was kept - and was kept with strict application would have put tremendous stress on those unsure and perhaps unhappy", and hence very much agree that the "balance the apostolic life with the monastic one" was very stressful.

It may not have been 'Sr Luke's time' but God placed her in the times He did - perhaps His Purpose was for her sanctification that she undergo the journey she did and write her book. It is a mystery as much about our own journeys can be a mystery to us. The why of it all. We can be assured, however, that God is always without fail acting in the interests of our sanctification and to build up The Mystical Body of Christ on earth.

Perhpas Sr Luke would have remained in religious life under the conditions applying today, but God placed her in the times in which she lived and she worked out her own salvation in the manner that she did with the exterior and internal circumstances God permitted to apply not only in the interests of her own santification but, mysteriously, in the interests of all - as applies to each one of us and our own times and journeys.

[BarbTherese]

[quote name='Antigonos' timestamp='1324536159' post='2355815']
It is worth remembering that Sister Luke entered in 1927, and left in the middle of the Second World War, in 1943. In the book it is mentioned that her family had suffered severely during the German occupation in the First World War, and, in both the book and the movie it's mentioned that her father was killed when a column of refugees he was helping was strafed by the Nazis. It is quite possible that had the war not occurred she would never have left--in spite of her problems with obedience, it was her inability to reconcile her feelings toward the Germans with her religious conscience that provoked the crisis.

[b][i]Everything[/i][/b] was very different then. She did enter an order devoted to nursing and teaching, but she particularly wanted to serve in the order's African missions, even though she knew the order ran a number of institutions in Belgium and that she was likely to be assigned to one of them. She was a very devout Catholic, but it has to be remembered, also, that in Europe at the time, nearly all professional nurses were religious. Apart from England, thanks to Florence Nightingale, which began training secular women as nurses in the 19th century, secular professional nursing really only got going in Europe during and after WWII. So it was logical for a devout woman to choose to be a nun if she wanted to do nursing.
[/quote]

I wanted to give this 'Props, but the facility did not appear on your post. Good observations I thought.

[emmaberry]

I always thought that, once the vow of obedience is taken, you can be sure that whatever command comes out of your superior's mouth is God's will for you in that moment. (Probably wrong, just wanted to throw that out there to all those who have way more experience with religious life!)

[BarbTherese]

[quote name='emmaberry' timestamp='1338951342' post='2441623']
I always thought that, once the vow of obedience is taken, you can be sure that whatever command comes out of your superior's mouth is God's will for you in that moment. (Probably wrong, just wanted to throw that out there to all those who have way more experience with religious life!)
[/quote]

Not much experience of religious life here, just "some experience of". The vow of obedience asks that one does vow to obey one's superior - and in doing so, one is following God's Will; however, such obedience is only in matters that are not sinful. There was considerable (if memory serves) discussion about Sister Luke of The Nun's Story refusing to obey her superior and fail her exams - whether her vow of obedience meant that she should have obeyed.
The discussion int he thread, I think, was whether Sister Luke was right in not obeying, since failing one's exams deliberately when one had the ability to pass the exam could be considered an untruth - that her superior was asking Sister Luke to be untruthful and this is sinful and therefore there was no obligation to obey. I can't recall how it was all settled as discussion in the thread unfolded.

In many communities nowadays, most superiors will discuss with a Sister some point of obedience, before the decision under discussion becomes a point of religious obedience. Usually, apparently, it is mutual agreement after discussion. This, of course, is not about whether one should, as an example, sweep the laundry floor, rather than the hallway - this is a minor matter and I should imagine no discussion would ensue, one simply obeys.

But then it is almost 25 years since I was in a monastic community and my personal experience did rather shock me that things were still very much pre V2 and little change had taken place - this does not mean that the same applies everywhere in a monastic community, merely a personal experience and 25 years ago now.

Edited June 6, 2012 by BarbaraTherese

[maximillion]

I agree with you BT........and I think it was discussed about the untruth/sinful aspect.

Following the Vow of Obedience does not dispense one from the discerning of spirits or mean one gives up ones intelligence and its applications.
My community (like you BT over 25 years ago now) were slightly of the planting cabbages upside down variety when I entered, i.e. very blind obedience required. In a few years and while I was still in a junior novice this had altered rather radically to a situation where just about everything was questioned - the excuse made was Renewal.

[BarbTherese]

[quote name='maximillion' timestamp='1338969049' post='2441671']
I agree with you BT........and I think it was discussed about the untruth/sinful aspect.

Following the Vow of Obedience does not dispense one from the discerning of spirits or mean one gives up ones intelligence and its applications.
My community (like you BT over 25 years ago now) were slightly of the planting cabbages upside down variety when I entered, i.e. very blind obedience required. In a few years and while I was still in a junior novice this had altered rather radically to a situation where just about everything was questioned - the excuse made was Renewal.
[/quote]

Having been in a monastic community in my teens that was the "planting cabbages upside down variety", when I entered a different religious order and monastic community in my early forties and some 25 or so years after my teen experience, I had supposed (ahhhh expectations!) that there would be considerable changes flowing from Vatican II in monastic life, I was really shocked to be asked to 'plant cabbages upside down please' once again!!!

I am in Australia and I was absolutely amazed that especially active communties which had been (to my mind overly)rigidly strict pre V2 almost overnight became astoundingly liberal - almost career women in The Church rather than religious per se. I have never been able to understand the mental gymnastics that applied in these communites for such extreme changes, and as an outsider looking in, all in the name of renewal of religious life and going back to the foundress's original vision. It seemed to me that things had gone radically adrift somewhere (from the original and the foundress) and I can't help but wonder if they still are.

[maximillion]

[quote][color=#282828]almost career women in The Church rather than religious per se.[/color][/quote]

My community suffered from this and we were enclosed contemplatives. It was so sad. I found myself in constant turmoil because of it and it was what lead me to ask to be exclaustrated. I am certain I am not the only one to have found myself in this situation.......

[BarbTherese]

I am very sorry that you had this experience, maximillion - it must have been indeed very painful especially with experiencing a call to the contemplative life. A very painful experience indeed to my thoughts. I am sure you are not alone either. I have known a few religious who left because of the situation within their religious orders and particular communities post V2 with the renewals and 'renewals' within.

Both my 'tours of duty' in contemplative life were journeys in extremely rigid pre V2 type situations in monastic communities and in both instances, I just asked to leave and did not have final profession to be concerned about. I dont know how life within these communities has now unfolded to this point - I dont keep contact any more. Both times, I was very much aware that what I was being called to was not what I was experiencing within monastic life, as I thought it would be (those expectations again!). I knew what I wasn't called to, but not that to which I was called and had always put that call into a monastic scenario. It wasn't until I left the community I had entered in my forties that I became acutely aware, I did not have a vocation to monastic life, to religious life - although stilll not knowing to what I was indeed called. My actual vocation had been unfolding, I gradually became aware, when I abandoned that unfolding to again seek to fulfill my personal desire - monastic life. Once I faced up to that illusion and accepted it, my vocation continued to unfold and has never ceased to do so. And as it has continued to do so, both my journeys in monastic life have spoken to that unfolding. I saw my director yesterday, and I was able to state quite comfortably that I feel all the loose strandds in my life are now coming together and to wind into the one strand i.e. my life, my journey. At 66yrs, I can only state with a smile : about jolly time, too!!! I can remember a time years ago when I used to say "I can't even find the ends, let alone make them meet".

I am hoping that you are finding something positive with the exclaustration. That the purpose of your life, your journey, is clarifying for you and through the experience of exclaustration as painful as it must be. How often The Lord indeed will write very straight in the most crooked of lines to human insight.

Edited June 6, 2012 by BarbaraTherese

[TIWW]

from BT
I was absolutely amazed that especially active communties which had been (to my mind overly)rigidly strict pre V2 almost overnight became astoundingly liberal - almost career women in The Church rather than religious per se. I have never been able to understand the mental gymnastics that applied in these communites for such extreme changes, and as an outsider looking in, all in the name of renewal of religious life and going back to the foundress's original vision. It seemed to me that things had gone radically adrift somewhere (from the original and the foundress) and I can't help but wonder if they still are.(quote)

I so agree. The 1960's was chaotic all the way around, culturally and within the Church. Religious communities were in turmoil following V2. I think mainly because, there was no [i]leadership[/i] per se, because folks were busy dealing with their own inner turmoil. In retrospect, some of it is understandable, but I think the Church made some huge errors in not preparing Major Superiors about "What does returning to the original charism" really mean, and how will that be best lived out in our specific circumstance? I remember the Franciscans in the city where I lived all came running from our parish to ask my mother to sew this or that [i]new habit. [/i]My mom could not understand why they would want to wear the alternative to their very beautiful habit, nor could I. After living so long with being told exactly what to do and how & when to do it, to[i] do whatever[/i] was probably a little too much freedom, all at once for some. Some communities took a more gradual and thoughtful approach, and survived a little better. The flood gates were open and many religious left [i]en masse. [/i] Also in retrospect, the men's communities seemed to weather the storm with less reactionary turmoil, though many left as well. I do think that the more Monastic communities like Benedictines and Dominicans who had a built in prayer schedule survived more intact. Having been in an apostolic community, it was a very difficult and painful time.

Edited June 6, 2012 by TIWW

[TIWW]

Regarding the Nun's Story, so magnificently played by Audrey Hepburn . . . There were some interesting ethical dilemmas regarding Sister Luke and the request by her superior to “fail” or “cheat” In the taking of her exam. In looking at this from the view of the two great Commandments 1) “Love the Lord thy God with your whole mind, your whole heart and your whole self and 2 Love your neighbor as yourself. And the commandment of Thou shall not bear false witness. And the Parable of the Talents . .
We are each given unique gifts and talents by God. Are we not meant to use them for the greater good?
It seems to me that the added vows of Poverty, Chastity and Obedience follow after these.
Was the Superior committing sin in asking Sr Luke to break the commandments?
Would Sister Luke committing sin to fail the exam? ( bearing false witness)
Would the Sister who could not pass the exam, do great harm if placed in a position to practice nursing, if she did not yet have the required skills to perform her duties?

[Antigonos]

[quote name='TIWW' timestamp='1339032750' post='2442018']
Regarding the Nun's Story, so magnificently played by Audrey Hepburn . . . There were some interesting ethical dilemmas Would the Sister who could not pass the exam, do great harm if placed in a position to practice nursing, if she did not yet have the required skills to perform her duties?
[/quote]

One has to remember that, at least as far as the Reverend Mother Emmanuel was concerned, Sr. Luke had been told at the outset that she was "the Christ among us, and is obeyed as such". The almost total reverence for superiors seems to have moderated after V2. Besides, what Sr. Luke was being asked was not to abandon nursing, but to abandon her missionary dream -- quite different. Perhaps nowadays it is more usual for superiors to try and accomodate any special skills a sister might have, but back then Sr. Luke could have been sent to do almost any task and was expected to acquiesce without a murmur. She herself correctly identifies her basic problem as one of pride and obedience even before taking her final vows. She notes that when she does something that indicates she has conquered her pride, she takes pride in the act of having done so, and of course, in her initial interview with her superior at the insane asylum, she admits that she has been assigned there to perfect herself in obedience.

I think we also need to remember that her order was, by today's standards, gigantic. Because of the rigorous training in avoiding "singularization", she was, in fact, little more than a number. That also seems to have been a problem for her. Throughout the book there is almost no mention of the skills or particular interests of the other sisters -- apart from recreation, they were not supposed to form any attachments to any particular sister but to remain at all times "detached". [In the book, she notes that during her postulancy, she would have loved to discuss her struggles with her sisters, but this was not allowed]

[AnneLine]

Good points, all. I do prefer the book because it lets us get inside Sr. Luke's head, so to speak, to understand her motivations, questions, desires, longings better than in the movie. (No insult intended to Audrey Hepburn--she turned in a wonderful performance!--but books are just a different medium.)

I sometimes think that Sr. Luke gets a tough rap because she is seen as a sister who 'gave up' her vocation. In my opinion, she actually discerned, correctly, that God wanted something DIFFERENT from her, and her choice to leave reflected that prayerful decision. It is clear in the book (and I think in the movie?) that she had some serious concerns BEFORE she took her vows, and that she shared those with her superiors. She was TOLD to disregard them. I personally think that was a wrong instruction from her superiors....

Sr. Luke struggled with her positions in the European convents, but did pretty well in the mission in in Africa (even though she was assigned to the 'hospital for Europeans' rather than the bush station of which she had dreamed. Mother Emmanuel noted that she was respected by the doctors and patients, and loved by her sisters. She must have been a good member of the community for them to have felt that way about her. She just was in the wrong hole, as we have noted before... and of course, all was different in the 1920-40's!!!

She struggled -- and I think this is key -- to reconcile her religious vocation with the legitimate demands her superiors were making of her as a nurse. She got permissions for all of the things she did up until the time of the war... and I will give her a little bit of leeway in some of her choices after the war started, because I suspect that almost everyone was doing things during the war that they would not have dreampt of in peace time. I don't judge anyone..... hard to know what any one of us would do in a similar situation. (If any of you have ever read The Deliverance of Sister Ceciila, she did many of the same kinds of things when the Communists came to her convent in Slovakia. (Great book, by the way....)

The community I was in in the 1980s still retained a great deal of the structure of life that Sr. Luke experienced. I wasn't surprised (because that was what I had expected) but I know it was a BIG shock to some of the other postulants. But it was a structure that I found was WAY too rigid for me.

In retrospect, I'm not at all sure that some of the orders I was given by my superiors were appropriate, and I think my concerns were valid... and I have always been at peace about entering, the life I lived while there, and the decision to leave. I probably would have struggled much as Sr. Luke did about many, many things. I was startled to know that (at least at that time) the community had a STRONG feeling that any secular literature should be avoided. (I think that has changed since then.) I was startled that the sisters who were going to college were being told to 'do as much as you need to get a passing grade, and pray that none of what you are learning will jeopardize your vocation.' I'm not sure that is an ideal way to approach an education... but that is one reason I am NOT in that community. I learned that God talks to me in my academic and secular reading... it not only is not a threat... it is important for my spiritual life!

I watched sisters struggling to get in all the prayer and community time and hold down a full time school schedule AND a full set of community work expectations. It was simply an unrealistic attempt to live a lifestyle that would have been appropriate for a cloister AND the life of an apostolic sister. I just am not convinced it will work.....at least not in our own time period....

The sisters who ended up staying and professing and are still there 30 years later figured out a way to balance it all. I wish them well, but I can also understand why many of the apostolic communities have chosen to structure their lives in community so that the obligations don't parallel what they would be in a cloister, but instead are a good, supportive religious life for teaching or nursing sisters. There's room for both kinds of structures, I think... and I agree with what TIWW said about the superiors not being given good guidance about what to change and what to leave. But that was true of all of society back then, I think.... and once the changes started, it was very hard to figure out where to draw the line. I feel sorry for the those sisters and communities that struggled and lost their way during that time....

I'm in a Secular Order that is part of one of the Mendicant Orders. I do the vocations/formation work for them. We make it a BIG point to encourage our aspirants, novices and temporarly professed to 'work the problem' -- that they must figure out how to balance their lives with their families, secular occupations, parish work, other charitable work AND figure out how to support that and enrich that with their prayertime. It is a hard struggle for us, too... but worth it!

Edited June 7, 2012 by AnneLine