Question For All You Carmelites

[marigold]

I guess I was just wondering why Carmel seems to have this romantic reputation. You're suggesting Therese and her flowers... But she didn't wear sandals did she - those Alberquerques or whatever they're called... ?

[LadyOfSorrows]

I didn't even like St. Therese when I first started discerning Carmel!

[Carmelshrimp]

Must admit I've never found Carmel particularly romantic. It's just the spirituality that resonates with me. There are other orders whose habits I think look more graceful or dramatic or just attractive, but Carmel speaks to me so deeply that I don't think I'd care if they dressed in plastic sacks and wore hob-nailed boots (although I'm glad they don't ). And I love Therese too, but like Faith I had to get past "Story of a Soul" and it's 19th century pious language before I realised how amazing she was.

[faithcecelia]

[quote name='marigold' timestamp='1319810704' post='2328184']
I guess I was just wondering why Carmel seems to have this romantic reputation. You're suggesting Therese and her flowers... But she didn't wear sandals did she - those Alberquerques or whatever they're called... ?
[/quote]

Therese actually had fur boots! She asked her aunt and uncle for them under obedience because she was always cold.

[Chiquitunga]

Though Therese [url="http://www.flickr.com/photos/marc_dan/4706305038/"]did have[/url] alpargatas too ..

[img]http://storage.canalblog.com/30/39/868244/65970497.jpg[/img]

[TIWW]

I am going to preface this with this is my [u]PERSONAL OPINION and observation and preference only[/u]. There are a lot of women on this site who love the Carmelite way of life and are called to live this life. They will not agree with how I see things. They are called to this , I am NOT.

I grew up loving the Little Flower, and wanting to emulate her life. Again the “romanticizing” of the life made a big impression on a 12 year old. I [i]read everything I could get my hands on. [/i]As an adult, as I read more, I began to see the life as one of almost “sick” in a very oppressive kind of way. The ways of mortification, isolation and the uncharitable ways they could treat each other in the name of obedience or “helping” them to become more “?holy” pretty much upset me. But this is my own personal response and thought about the whole thing. I could not see what they did or how they lived as anything but a little off and a way of controlling every little aspect of one’s physical, mental and spiritual life. In other words, a religious life of severe micro managing of everything. Now this fits well for some people. For some, it is OK to be told by exterior rules, mannerisms and customs how to live, nearly every segment of the day, [i]what to pray[/i] while you are doing this or that. I could never do this, do not find it in the least bit attractive and it would not be the life for me.
I believe how one wants to live out a spiritual life has to be integrated with one’s unique psychological, mental and spiritual being. If someone believes that personal mortification and denial, exteior controls and customs somehow makes that way of living pleasing to God, then it is a great thing for that person. My belief system is one more about how can I love God and others the best I can.How can I be closer to Him? Very simplistic way of trying to say something very complicated, but there are many, many Spiritualities out there, whose “way of life" is vastly different. The Benedictine and Visitation, Dominican, Franciscan and many others have a very different approach than the Carmelites or Carthusians. One might look at the Trappistines and think what an extremely difficult way of life: hard physical work, getting up in the middle of the night for the Night Office, a lot of silence. But for me, the Trappistines had a most appealing interior life of prayer and community life, they had personal time built into their day that was not regulated by exterior controls. Here is an example, having to ask someone in Carmel for permission to have a glass of water or piece of bread in the middle of the day when you might be thirsty or hungry. The Trappistines would assume that you kinew yourself if you needed a drink, or would do better if you ate something to make it through until the next meal. Not sure if this makes any sense. Some people like, need and thrive with a lot of exterior controls. Others thrive in a more open, personally chosen atmosphere. Knowing ones’ self, and what enriches your own spiritual life is so important. That is why entering many of the more cloistered and “difficult” communities ask that the age of the candidate be over 21, because some of that interior formation has already begun. We all mature into our own personalities at different ages.

Edited October 28, 2011 by TIWW

[marigold]

Thank you for your thoughts, TIWW. I look forward to seeing what others write in response. (Don't feel I have anything to add obvs, still just an interested observer.)

[beatitude]

There are Carmelites monasteries that allow you to help yourself to a drink of water or a small snack whenever you feel the need. There are non-Carmelite monasteries (including Trappistine) where permission must be asked. All religious take a vow of obedience, but the definition on the best way to live out that calling to faithfulness and trust will take on a different flavour from community to community (even within the same order).

I think Carmel places a special emphasis on obedience because it counterbalances (and nourishes) the eremitical aspect of the life. When you are living as hermits in community, an intensely solitary life, it reminds you of our human need for one another if you have to go to another sister and ask for some extra food. It's humbling, but it's not humiliating. In this context, it's not controlling.

But it might be experienced as such, and I think this is where the romanticisation comes in. People look at the beautiful symbolism in all of Carmel's customs, and they appreciate that beauty. They don't think about how difficult it must be to live the customs out. They think it sounds like a lovely thing to kneel in the refectory and ask your sisters' pardon for a mistake you made - but they are less likely to think of how it might feel to do that when you are convinced you're in the right and you're in an indignant internal uproar over having to apologise for something you don't see as wrong or your fault. Romanticisation always forgets about human nature.

As for why Carmel gets romanticised so much, I think this happens because it's the best-known order (because of Therese). I have known people to romanticise the Missionaries of Charities also, especially their emphasis on living as 'the poorest of the poor' - until they found out that the poorest of the poor eat sheep's nose and whatever else happens to be going spare. I doubt people would build up this daydream of them quite so much if it hadn't been for the fame of Mother Teresa, as with Therese.

[OnlySunshine]

[quote name='beatitude' timestamp='1319828330' post='2328260']
There are Carmelites monasteries that allow you to help yourself to a drink of water or a small snack whenever you feel the need. There are non-Carmelite monasteries (including Trappistine) where permission must be asked. All religious take a vow of obedience, but the definition on the best way to live out that calling to faithfulness and trust will take on a different flavour from community to community (even within the same order).

I think Carmel places a special emphasis on obedience because it counterbalances (and nourishes) the eremitical aspect of the life. When you are living as hermits in community, an intensely solitary life, it reminds you of our human need for one another if you have to go to another sister and ask for some extra food. It's humbling, but it's not humiliating. In this context, it's not controlling.

But it might be experienced as such, and I think this is where the romanticisation comes in. People look at the beautiful symbolism in all of Carmel's customs, and they appreciate that beauty. They don't think about how difficult it must be to live the customs out. They think it sounds like a lovely thing to kneel in the refectory and ask your sisters' pardon for a mistake you made - but they are less likely to think of how it might feel to do that when you are convinced you're in the right and you're in an indignant internal uproar over having to apologise for something you don't see as wrong or your fault. Romanticisation always forgets about human nature.

As for why Carmel gets romanticised so much, I think this happens because it's the best-known order (because of Therese). [b]I have known people to romanticise the Missionaries of Charities also, especially their emphasis on living as 'the poorest of the poor' - until they found out that the poorest of the poor eat sheep's nose and whatever else happens to be going spare.[/b] I doubt people would build up this daydream of them quite so much if it hadn't been for the fame of Mother Teresa, as with Therese.
[/quote]

Exactly! I know a CFR Sister who was discerning with them at one point, and she said that she was surprised to learn about some of their customs. It didn't deter her from discerning with them, but she felt God was not calling her there. I've heard that they have NO running water at all. They take all of their washes in a bucket. I don't think that life is for me, but I respect those who are called there. Mother Teresa was a pioneer.

[AccountDeleted]

[quote name='TIWW' timestamp='1319821159' post='2328229']
I am going to preface this with this is my [u]PERSONAL OPINION and observation and preference only[/u]. There are a lot of women on this site who love the Carmelite way of life and are called to live this life. They will not agree with how I see things. They are called to this , I am NOT.

I grew up loving the Little Flower, and wanting to emulate her life. Again the “romanticizing” of the life made a big impression on a 12 year old. I [i]read everything I could get my hands on. [/i]As an adult, as I read more, I began to see the life as one of almost “sick” in a very oppressive kind of way. The ways of mortification, isolation and the uncharitable ways they could treat each other in the name of obedience or “helping” them to become more “?holy” pretty much upset me. But this is my own personal response and thought about the whole thing. I could not see what they did or how they lived as anything but a little off and a way of controlling every little aspect of one’s physical, mental and spiritual life. In other words, a religious life of severe micro managing of everything. Now this fits well for some people. For some, it is OK to be told by exterior rules, mannerisms and customs how to live, nearly every segment of the day, [i]what to pray[/i] while you are doing this or that. I could never do this, do not find it in the least bit attractive and it would not be the life for me.
I believe how one wants to live out a spiritual life has to be integrated with one’s unique psychological, mental and spiritual being. If someone believes that personal mortification and denial, exteior controls and customs somehow makes that way of living pleasing to God, then it is a great thing for that person. My belief system is one more about how can I love God and others the best I can.How can I be closer to Him? Very simplistic way of trying to say something very complicated, but there are many, many Spiritualities out there, whose “way of life" is vastly different. The Benedictine and Visitation, Dominican, Franciscan and many others have a very different approach than the Carmelites or Carthusians. One might look at the Trappistines and think what an extremely difficult way of life: hard physical work, getting up in the middle of the night for the Night Office, a lot of silence. But for me, the Trappistines had a most appealing interior life of prayer and community life, they had personal time built into their day that was not regulated by exterior controls. Here is an example, having to ask someone in Carmel for permission to have a glass of water or piece of bread in the middle of the day when you might be thirsty or hungry. The Trappistines would assume that you kinew yourself if you needed a drink, or would do better if you ate something to make it through until the next meal. Not sure if this makes any sense. Some people like, need and thrive with a lot of exterior controls. Others thrive in a more open, personally chosen atmosphere. Knowing ones’ self, and what enriches your own spiritual life is so important. That is why entering many of the more cloistered and “difficult” communities ask that the age of the candidate be over 21, because some of that interior formation has already begun. We all mature into our own personalities at different ages.
[/quote]


A very interesting observation from someone who does not feel called to the Carmelite way of life. I won't comment on what you have said except to acknowledge that there are many misunderstandings about the Carmelite charism, even within some Carmelite communities - but then I attribute this to the fact that we are all human beings and as such, subject to weakness and error. But with all things, God can use them to His glory and make saints out of sinners.

I have lived with the Missionaries of Charity and with different Carmelite communities. What I have learned in that God calls us all in different ways at different times for His own reasons. Our job is simply to love and trust Him and let Him do His work.

Thank you for sharing your perspective. I enjoyed reading it.

[brandelynmarie]

[quote name='Carmelshrimp' timestamp='1319812272' post='2328189']
Must admit I've never found Carmel particularly romantic. It's just the spirituality that resonates with me. There are other orders whose habits I think look more graceful or dramatic or just attractive, but Carmel speaks to me so deeply that I don't think I'd care if they dressed in plastic sacks and wore hob-nailed boots (although I'm glad they don't ). And I love Therese too, but like Faith I had to get past "Story of a Soul" and it's 19th century pious language before I realised how amazing she was.
[/quote]


Trying to picture this...

[maximillion]

This is a very interesting thread and thanks for sharing thoughts. Here are mine. I discerned as it is now called, in 1973 for about 18 mths. Before that I had read Story of a Soul, and though training as a nusre, fell in love with Carmel for the reasons given here:
[quote]People look at the beautiful symbolism in all of Carmel's customs, and they appreciate that beauty. They don't think about how difficult it must be to live the customs out. They think it sounds like a lovely thing to kneel in the refectory and ask your sisters' pardon for a mistake you made [/quote]
plus other aspects - the Austerity, I wanted to be a Saint and I equated sainthood with austerity. I was a natural loner and I woke early.......

Having visited a couple of Carmels as well as some Benedictines, I went on retreat and found a SD.
One of the retreats was given by a priest who had knowledge of a Sacred Heart Community in France, and when I visited ( guest house, no live in) I was very attracted. I read St Margaret Mary's life and the devotion to the sacred heart chimed with me. I entered.
In community, which was Ignation, I found there was a tradition (not a requirement) that we ask for everything, including an extra drink of water as well as permission to sing, etc. This was done in a spirit not of control but of humility and of deference to the Vow of Obedience as well as Lady Poverty. If I am truly poor, even my will is not my own, I laid it at the alter foot on the day I made Vows.......
I found this an incredibly freeing experience. To have nothing, not even my own decisions...........
For me it was a very radical acceptance and living out of my Vows, an expression of them that gave me a profound joy, a lightness of being and something that reinforced my total surrender to, and in His Heart.

I never found this tradition in the slightest humiliating, for simple things one asked permission of the nearest Professed sister, and I recall with a lump in my throat the many many warm smiles, looks of tender affection and sisterly concern with which these requests were met. When I was still a newbie, an older Professed nun sat me down, made the sign for me to wait, and went and fetched a glass of water for me. Her whole manner was that of Christ caring for his lamb.

As the V2 changes came in, this was one of the things that, very sadly, went out the window. Though it had never been a requirement, many of the younger sisters considered it was 'infantile'! I did not share their views. It was one of the many changes that for me, altered our spirituality and which led eventually to my leaving.

[Aya Sophia]

TIWW's words in italics, mine not
[indent=1][i]" As an adult, as I read more, I began to see the life as one of almost “sick” in a very oppressive kind of way. The ways of mortification, isolation and the uncharitable ways they could treat each other in the name of obedience or “helping” them to become more “?holy” pretty much upset me. But this is my own personal response and thought about the whole thing. I could not see what they did or how they lived as anything but a little off and a way of controlling every little aspect of one’s physical, mental and spiritual life. In other words, a religious life of severe micro managing of everything. Now this fits well for some people. For some, it is OK to be told by exterior rules, mannerisms and customs how to live, nearly every segment of the day, what to pray while you are doing this or that. I could never do this, do not find it in the least bit attractive and it would not be the life for me."[/i][/indent]
It is true, I think, that the austere Carmel (of yore and of today, although today greatly outnumbered by the gentler Carmels with a mitigated rule) present an automatic hazard for a person with a certain kind of history. If we're a person for whom the first authority in our lives (meaning, that of our parents) has been severe, exacting and punitive and if we haven't received sufficient healing for the wounds caused by this abuse of authority then an austere Carmel may not be the best fit for us.
------------------------------------------------------------
[indent=1][i]"I believe how one wants to live out a spiritual life has to be integrated with one’s unique psychological, mental and spiritual being."[/i][/indent]
Amen, amen to this, of course. And, for some (few, it is true) the life and ethos of Carmel fulfill their deepest longing which is for God.

------------------------------------------------------------[indent=1][i]"If someone believes that personal mortification and denial, exteior controls and customs somehow makes that way of living pleasing to God, then it is a great thing for that person." [/i][/indent]
I don't know any Carmelites who think this. The Carmelites I know live the life because of a sense that a deep, interior cleaving to God in faith is His will for them and they, in turn, wish and will and long to cleave to Him this way. They live the life in the quiet darkness of faith - quiet, eventually, because they have, through ascesis and grace, passed through major battles of the passions and come to a certain peace and stillness in the lower operations of the soul. With regard to "exterior controls and customs", the intense awareness that outside observers seem to have of these things is not actually part of a Carmelite's vision. For a Carmelite in Carmel, the externals are just part of the warp and the woof of the fabric of daily life.

----------------------------------------------------------------------- [indent=1][i]having to ask someone in Carmel for permission to have a glass of water or piece of bread in the middle of the day when you might be thirsty or hungry. The Trappistines would assume that you kinew yourself if you needed a drink, or would do better if you ate something to make it through until the next meal.[/i][/indent]

Fasting between meals is typical monastic practice and not at all an unusual austerity. Also a typical monastic practice is expressing an additional need you may have to your Priores or NM and having it met.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
[indent=1][i]Some people like, need and thrive with a lot of exterior controls.[/i][/indent]

Nobody "thrive(s)" with a lot of exterior controls. Nobody really "likes" them either. Some people do "need" them but this need is, or should be, impermanent. As we mature, our conscience becomes or should become interiorised so that we no longer depend on external controls and authority. In between, we may pass through a kind of "teenhood" when we resent and want to buck off authority which we experience as oppressive and humiliating and a threat to our (emergent) sense of oursellves. Eventually, with maturity, authority takes it proper place in our lives. We are not rudderless when external authority is absent nor do we feel diminished by the requirements external authority makes of us and wish to throw it off. Instead we have a sure sense of self which includes an internal authority, based on a well-formed conscience, that is comfortable folding its wings to make way for any external authority which may take precedence.

Edited October 30, 2011 by Aya Sophia