Convents And Family Visits Per Year

[emmaberry]

[quote name='FuturePriest387' timestamp='1338658818' post='2439944']
Oh, it's loads all right.

I do suppose it is quite a bit. I'm just usually looking for once a month with a vacation when I look into communities like I am used to, and when I see once every three months without vacation I think "I'm not a cloistered Nun, you know!". I suppose I should be more grateful, though. At least I'll see them more than once a year if I join them. I'm not sure how long the visits last, but I can imagine it's not only for one day.
[/quote]

I know what you mean, and I AM going to be a cloistered nun!

I am not sure how old you are, but I am 19, and I have a feeling this is a consequence of young vocations (ie the attachment to families, concern over amount of visits, etc)

Forgive me if your 40

[PhuturePriest]

[quote name='emmaberry' timestamp='1338696028' post='2440136']
I know what you mean, and I AM going to be a cloistered nun!

I am not sure how old you are, but I am 19, and I have a feeling this is a consequence of young vocations (ie the attachment to families, concern over amount of visits, etc)

Forgive me if your 40
[/quote]

Ha. Well, I am fifteen. I honestly don't think every three months is that bad, it's just not what communities usually do so I was a bit surprised. And it's not like I can never visit home, despite not having vacations. If the Friars ever go in the area some family or friends live they always make sure I get time to visit them somehow, so it's a pretty good deal.

And congratulations, by the way. When are you entering? And what community, if you don't mind my asking?

[emmaberry]

FuturePriest: Oh--I am not set to enter anywhere right now! I am hoping to find the right Poor Clare convent this summer, although God is probably laughing at my little "plans"!

That's great that your discerning the priesthood at 15! My brother is 12 and I hope he's like you when he's 15, and not the guitar hero playing little rascal he is now! KIDDING

Edited June 6, 2012 by emmaberry

[Tally Marx]

The Carmelites I know allow family to visit one hour a month.

The non-cloistered community I'm discerning with allows family to visit one weekend a year.

No home visits for either. It really varies.

[emmaberry]

Thank you Tally Marx! That is just the kind of information I am looking for. Which Carmel are you speaking of?

[srmariam]

The 3 Carmels I have been in have all allowed family visits once a month and occasional friend visits (maybe 4 a year) each for an hour. If the visitors have had to travel a long way - such as I am in another country! - visits are less frequent but longer. My parents used to come once a year for about a week and Id see them most days of that week.

[krissylou]

[quote name='krissylou' timestamp='1338585538' post='2439642']
[img]http://stanthonyshrine.org/PoorClares/images/parlor_sm.jpg[/img]

[/quote]

I just have one question, based on this picture and where everyone in the family is positioned.

Did that baby enter?????

[TryingtobeaSaint]

I'm not sure you should chose a community based on your vacation time. :stubborn:

If you are pro family and pro life I think you should choose on allowed family contact if not vacation time. The restrictions some women's religious orders put on family contact do not speak well of their vocation. Are we really afraid they will lose their vocation if allowed to contact their family? It doesn't speak well of love.  Jesus was born into a family, his Mother was often around but we seem to think that contact with the family will demean the vocation? Diocesan priest are encouraged to be in contact with  their family. But some women's religious orders, Hare Krishna and cults limit contact for control. 

[brandelynmarie]

If you are pro family and pro life I think you should choose on allowed family contact if not vacation time. The restrictions some women's religious orders put on family contact do not speak well of their vocation. Are we really afraid they will lose their vocation if allowed to contact their family? It doesn't speak well of love. Jesus was born into a family, his Mother was often around but we seem to think that contact with the family will demean the vocation? Diocesan priest are encouraged to be in contact with their family. But some women's religious orders, Hare Krishna and cults limit contact for control.

The restrictions are not about lack of love of family...to be cloistered is a vocation to be more present for God...to listen to Him & intercede for others. Contemplatives' life of prayer must be rooted in silence & healthy detachment.

I can imagine you have at least one friend or family member that doesn't live near you & yet when you see them, there isn't a loss of love between you two. :buddies: I believe it is the same for the cloistered Contemplatives & their loved ones. :)


Also, the difference between a religious community & a cult is the exercising of free-will. A sister in formation & a community has many years to decide if this is the sister's vocation or not. She is free to leave at any time. In a cult, you are threatened in some way so as to never leave. Cults tend to be emotionally & even physically abusive. I'm not saying that there are not unhealthy religious communities out there, but somewhere on VS is a thread about signs of a unhealthy religious community. Edited September 23, 2014 by brandelynmarie

[SilentJoy]

Also, the difference between a religious community & a cult is the exercising of free-will. A sister in formation & a community has many years to decide if this is the sister's vocation or not. She is free to leave at any time.

One thing that I really appreciate about the community that I am currently discerning with (and I'm sure this is true for many communities), is that their Vocations Directress has always maintained a very "hands-off" approach toward my discernment and left me lots of room to explore; for a while I assumed that I just wasn't very interesting... :hehe2: .Not only have I never felt pursued or pressured to make any decisions, but she also suggested excuses for me to NOT apply. I have always felt that I could make the choice freely, and whatever I decided was absolutely fine, and if I changed my mind later, that was fine too.

 

I had some ideals that I was looking for in a religious community and one of them was monthly visits; NOT because I actually wanted to visit my family every month -- that would be waaaay too often for me!! -- but for my family's sake, so that they would feel like they weren't being excluded and that they always had the option to stop by if they wanted to. (Of course, although monthly visits are permitted in many communities, that doesn't mean that they happen; sometimes families still only visit once a year or so, or every few years.) It was definitely not on my radar to pursue a community that only permitted annual visits, but that is what I am doing. It took a while for me to be "okay" with that because I don't want to cause pain to my family (especially my dad), but in my physical absence, I've grown a lot closer to them because now I am able to express my heart and mind in a beautiful way that was impossible before. In one letter home, I can give my family a clearer image of myself than I could in ten years of living around them almost daily.

[AccountDeleted]

The restrictions are not about lack of love of family...to be cloistered is a vocation to be more present for God...to listen to Him & intercede for others. Contemplatives' life of prayer must be rooted in silence & healthy detachment.

I can imagine you have at least one friend or family member that doesn't live near you & yet when you see them, there isn't a loss of love between you two. :buddies: I believe it is the same for the cloistered Contemplatives & their loved ones. :)


Also, the difference between a religious community & a cult is the exercising of free-will. A sister in formation & a community has many years to decide if this is the sister's vocation or not. She is free to leave at any time. In a cult, you are threatened in some way so as to never leave. Cults tend to be emotionally & even physically abusive. I'm not saying that there are not unhealthy religious communities out there, but somewhere on VS is a thread about signs of a unhealthy religious community.

 

 

Having lived in both a cult (in the early 70s) and in religious communities, I can assure you that many religious communities still have 'cult-like' attributes, although they may not be labelled specifically as cults. Similarities include not having control of one's money, owning no individual possessions, having no control over one's daily schedule, contact with 'outsiders' being controlled, sometimes lack of sleep and perhaps even food issues (eating when told to, nothing between meals), answering to someone in total authority, etc, etc, etc. These things in and of themselves do not make a community into a cult, but to automatically assume that a religious community is NOT a cult, is naive.

 

And a person is not usually 'forced' to stay in a cult just as they aren't forced to stay in religious life. It is all about 'brain washing' and mind control, and this can be done in a very subtle way in both cults and religious communities. Tactics that are used include, fear of displeasing authority, psychological intimidation, peer pressure, humiliation (a breaking down of one's will) and the threat of loss (being excluded from the community or cult or feeling like a failure). There are many very healthy communities in the Catholic Church but there are still more unhealthy ones than there should be. And this is caused by inflexible and rigid attitudes to simple things like this very topic - being allowed to see family.

 

There is no valid reason why a cloistered nun should not be allowed to have visits from her family and/or friends when appropriate or necessary or in special circumstances, with approval, to visit a dying parent or attend a funeral of one if so desired. This in no way detracts from one's inner connection with God, and if it does, then the problem lies within the person - because it is psychologically unhealthy for a person to have to become so emotionally 'detached' that they can't even be trusted to see and visit with loved ones - this leads to a psychological state called dissociation and may be why so many solemnly professed nuns that I have met have needed therapy! We are human beings, and as such, we are part of the community of humanity, and the Church, and our families, and then our religious communities. God knows and understands this. And in fact, a healthy community will accept one's family into their hearts as part of their own extended family, asking after them, sharing in their sufferings and joys and praying for each nun's family and close friends. Communities that see the 'outside world' as 'contaminating' are missing the whole point of God's universal love for all humankind.

 

A healthy community will understand and allow human interaction to foster and develop the individual's need to share with others the love that they are experiencing from their own relationship with God. This can be done sensibly and still stay within the bounds of both the Rule and Constitutions - especially for Carmelites, whose Rule includes my two favorite statements: "Need is not governed by law." and "Common sense is the guide to the virtues." Any community that does not allow this should be carefully examined for other signs of cult-like behavior or attitudes. 

 

I know this is just my opinion but I speak from experience here, folks and a lot of heartache can be avoided by being careful BEFORE you enter and not assuming that every so-called 'traditional' community is healthy. Any community that sees their nun's families as 'threats' to their way of life, has some serious problems, in my opinion, and yes, should be considered as being of cult-like status.

 

On the positive side, be assured that there are also healthy communities that may share some of the same appearances as a cult (loss of control of finances, adherence to daily schedule etc) but whose application of their Rule and customs is both inclusive and life-affirming, and flexible enough to consider exceptions on an 'as needed' basis. 

 

:)

[Lilllabettt]

Having lived in both a cult (in the early 70s) and in religious communities, I can assure you that many religious communities still have 'cult-like' attributes, although they may not be labelled specifically as cults. Similarities include not having control of one's money, owning no individual possessions, having no control over one's daily schedule, contact with 'outsiders' being controlled, sometimes lack of sleep and perhaps even food issues (eating when told to, nothing between meals), answering to someone in total authority, etc, etc, etc. These things in and of themselves do not make a community into a cult, but to automatically assume that a religious community is NOT a cult, is naive.

 

And a person is not usually 'forced' to stay in a cult just as they aren't forced to stay in religious life. It is all about 'brain washing' and mind control, and this can be done in a very subtle way in both cults and religious communities. Tactics that are used include, fear of displeasing authority, psychological intimidation, peer pressure, humiliation (a breaking down of one's will) and the threat of loss (being excluded from the community or cult or feeling like a failure). There are many very healthy communities in the Catholic Church but there are still more unhealthy ones than there should be. And this is caused by inflexible and rigid attitudes to simple things like this very topic - being allowed to see family.

 

There is no valid reason why a cloistered nun should not be allowed to have visits from her family and/or friends when appropriate or necessary or in special circumstances, with approval, to visit a dying parent or attend a funeral of one if so desired. This in no way detracts from one's inner connection with God, and if it does, then the problem lies within the person - because it is psychologically unhealthy for a person to have to become so emotionally 'detached' that they can't even be trusted to see and visit with loved ones - this leads to a psychological state called dissociation and may be why so many solemnly professed nuns that I have met have needed therapy! We are human beings, and as such, we are part of the community of humanity, and the Church, and our families, and then our religious communities. God knows and understands this. And in fact, a healthy community will accept one's family into their hearts as part of their own extended family, asking after them, sharing in their sufferings and joys and praying for each nun's family and close friends. Communities that see the 'outside world' as 'contaminating' are missing the whole point of God's universal love for all humankind.

 

A healthy community will understand and allow human interaction to foster and develop the individual's need to share with others the love that they are experiencing from their own relationship with God. This can be done sensibly and still stay within the bounds of both the Rule and Constitutions - especially for Carmelites, whose Rule includes my two favorite statements: "Need is not governed by law." and "Common sense is the guide to the virtues." Any community that does not allow this should be carefully examined for other signs of cult-like behavior or attitudes. 

 

I know this is just my opinion but I speak from experience here, folks and a lot of heartache can be avoided by being careful BEFORE you enter and not assuming that every so-called 'traditional' community is healthy. Any community that sees their nun's families as 'threats' to their way of life, has some serious problems, in my opinion, and yes, should be considered as being of cult-like status.

 

On the positive side, be assured that there are also healthy communities that may share some of the same appearances as a cult (loss of control of finances, adherence to daily schedule etc) but whose application of their Rule and customs is both inclusive and life-affirming, and flexible enough to consider exceptions on an 'as needed' basis. 

 

:)

 

 

Correct me if I am wrong, you are currently a postulant in a less traditional Carmelite community, after having tried your vocation in a string of more traditional communities.

 

In religious life there is that quasi-"brainwashing" element in that people in formation tend to absorb the way of thinking in the group around them. Its not necessarily a malevolent thing, or something unique to religious communities -- just a tendency of groups, clubs, etc.

 

My point is that I think it is not an accident that the change in your thinking about how Carmelite life ought to be observed has coincided with your being  formed by a group with a different take on Carmel. 

 

 

There are many very healthy communities in the Catholic Church but there are still more unhealthy ones than there should be. And this is caused by inflexible and rigid attitudes to simple things like this very topic - being allowed to see family.

 

There is no valid reason why a cloistered nun should not be allowed to have visits from her family and/or friends when appropriate or necessary or in special circumstances, with approval, to visit a dying parent or attend a funeral of one if so desired

 

The "valid reason" is that it is how the community has chosen to live its rule. Of course its important for applicants to understand that this is how the community lives before they choose to enter. Its important they are mature enough to effectively make their choice. (Modern society being what it is, I think its a positive trend that more cloistered communities are upping the minimum age to 21. ) But its equally important to respect the agency of men and women who are mature and do freely choose that way of life.  That is the defining line between healthy and unhealthy in religious communities - agency. Is separation from family a free, positive choice, or is it because contact is viewed as a threat. Is it presented as a free choice to be taken or left by mature people or do people in formation feel they are being "watched" or kept from some kind of danger.  

 

There are many kinds of rigidity. It goes both ways. Better to be flexible in accepting as valid the many different ways people live consecrated life. The Carthusians do not go home for funerals and receive a visit from parents once a year; in community they have a long walk once a week in which they are allowed to speak freely with each other; other than that they live in total silence. Surely a rare vocation; unhealthy for 99% of people. Still - an incredible gift to the Church and a very valid way of living consecrated life. 

[AccountDeleted]

Correct me if I am wrong, you are currently a postulant in a less traditional Carmelite community, after having tried your vocation in a string of more traditional communities.
 
In religious life there is that quasi-"brainwashing" element in that people in formation tend to absorb the way of thinking in the group around them. Its not necessarily a malevolent thing, or something unique to religious communities -- just a tendency of groups, clubs, etc.
 
My point is that I think it is not an accident that the change in your thinking about how Carmelite life ought to be observed has coincided with your being  formed by a group with a different take on Carmel. 
 
 
The "valid reason" is that it is how the community has chosen to live its rule. Of course its important for applicants to understand that this is how the community lives before they choose to enter. Its important they are mature enough to effectively make their choice. (Modern society being what it is, I think its a positive trend that more cloistered communities are upping the minimum age to 21. ) But its equally important to respect the agency of men and women who are mature and do freely choose that way of life.  That is the defining line between healthy and unhealthy in religious communities - agency. Is separation from family a free, positive choice, or is it because contact is viewed as a threat. Is it presented as a free choice to be taken or left by mature people or do people in formation feel they are being "watched" or kept from some kind of danger.  
 
There are many kinds of rigidity. It goes both ways. Better to be flexible in accepting as valid the many different ways people live consecrated life. The Carthusians do not go home for funerals and receive a visit from parents once a year; in community they have a long walk once a week in which they are allowed to speak freely with each other; other than that they live in total silence. Surely a rare vocation; unhealthy for 99% of people. Still - an incredible gift to the Church and a very valid way of living consecrated life.

 
 
Actually Lilllabettt, you really have no idea what type of community I am in nor can you comment on my thoughts or feelings as you are not privy to them. I simply stated my experience of both healthy and unhealthy communities and also what to look for when discerning. Certainly my ideas have changed over the years as I have gained more experience in different communities and in different countries. That does not mean that I invalidate any truly healthy expression of religious life, no matter how strict its application.
 
At no time have I said that it is wrong for a community to live its vocation in the way that it considers to be valid. I was pointing out that unhealthy communities do exist in an almost cult-like state even today and that one needs to be careful in their discernment. For some, that will include an almost hermit like existence and for others, an active apostolate in a helping field or simply a life of prayer within a cloistered environment. 

 

And although it might appear that my judgment of some communities is simply 'sour grapes' for not continuing there, the last community where I was had an official Visitation with three Visitators (a priest and two nuns, one active and one Carmelite) interviewing all the nuns for a half hour each over a three day period. Their final report came back exactly as I had expected, that they were too rigid and inflexible and that their authority structure was still based on pre-Vatican 2 models with little concern for the welfare of the sisters. The main concern of the Visitators was whether or not the customs of the community were 'life-affirming' and healthy for the sisters but their conclusion was that it was dysfunctional. The response from the Prioress and Novice Mistress? To come down even harder on the nuns and make them feel bad for the outcome of the report. Two of the nuns were in therapy and one eventually asked for a transfer to another community. It was a very cult-like and unhealthy place. And yet, to all appearances they are a 'perfect' traditional Carmelite community.
 
But yes, rigidity does go both ways. I have witnessed both on phatmass and in the Catholic Church in various places I have lived, many inflexible attitudes that fail to respect the way that others view things. My concerns in this thread however, were with regard to communities that 'appear' to be attractive because of their external expression of religious life, but fail to carry the spirit of their founder/ress into everyday life. Many customs and traditions, especially within the Carmelite life, were not established by the founder/ress of the community but by later generations and cultures as new foundations were made in different countries. 
 
Your statement:
Is separation from family a free, positive choice, or is it because contact is viewed as a threat. Is it presented as a free choice to be taken or left by mature people or do people in formation feel they are being "watched" or kept from some kind of danger. 
 
is very valid and that is my concern too - does the applicant truly understand the restrictions and limitations imposed by a particular community before entering  and can they really make an informed choice if they don't enter? Postulancy is supposed to be a time of discernment for both the individual and the community but it is during this time that very often one is made to feel that if they do not truly accept these restrictions, then they are somehow to blame or lacking in some way. That is on a par with cult mentality - that if the applicant disagrees with the particular interpretation and/or application of the Rule, then it is because they are somehow lacking, not because they simply haven't found the right expression of religious life for them and need to seek elsewhere.

 

I agree there can be healthy communities that are very traditional and strict in their application of their Rule, but most Rules allow for some flexibility in cases of necessity. To do otherwise would to be simply unChristian. Jesus healed the woman bent over double on the Sabbath and when told there were six other days he could do this, why did He have to do it on the Sabbath, replied that they were hypocrites because they would lead their donkey to water on the Sabbath, so why should a daughter of Abraham (and God!) not also be healed on the Sabbath. Rules are there for us, we are not there for rules. Mercy is the keyword these days - and I think it's really great that we are finally starting to focus on that aspect of God's love for us. Religious life should certainly echo this attribute of God.

 

Edited to add that both St Teresa and St John of the Cross were very close to their families, and St John even had his mother living with him in the monastery. Enclosure is not a prison, it is a gift, and if these two saints did not find their families threatening to their way of life, then why should we?

Edited September 23, 2014 by nunsense

[Lilllabettt]

 

 

Actually Lilllabettt, you really have no idea what type of community I am in nor can you comment on my thoughts or feelings as you are not privy to them. I simply stated my experience of both healthy and unhealthy communities and also what to look for when discerning. 

 

Hmmmm maybe you have not explicitly mentioned it -- so it is true that it is impossible for me to "know." I guess I could say I have a fairly strong impression, based on things that you have mentioned here and there about what you are doing and how I line those things up with my understanding of how religious life works. Feel free to confirm, correct, or ignore that impression. Re: the rest, I was only commenting on the thoughts you have shared on the phorum. I'm privy to those, as is the rest of the world.

 

 

 At no time have I said that it is wrong for a community to live its vocation in the way that it considers to be valid.

 

Just to be clear, what you said was: 

 

 

There is no valid reason why a cloistered nun should not be allowed to have visits from her family and/or friends when appropriate or necessary or in special circumstances, with approval, to visit a dying parent or attend a funeral of one if so desired. 

 

 

Which is, in my opinion, incorrect. There are quite a few communities that do not send members to be with dying parents or for funerals, and their reasons are not automatically "invalid."  I mentioned the Carthusians. You probably know better than me - but from what I know the Missionaries of Charity see their families every 10 years or so - I mean their active Sisters. I knew a Sister whose father died and it wasn't possible for her to attend the funeral because of the observance of this rule.  In all honesty I don't know really what the reason for this rule is, but I think the presumption should be that it is a "valid" one. No doubt there are things about the M.C.s that could be improved but they are hardly a cult. 

 

 

 

is very valid and that is my concern too - does the applicant truly understand the restrictions and limitations imposed by a particular community before entering  and can they really make an informed choice if they don't enter? Postulancy is supposed to be a time of discernment for both the individual and the community but it is during this time that very often one is made to feel that if they do not truly accept these restrictions, then they are somehow to blame or lacking in some way. That is on a par with cult mentality - that if the applicant disagrees with the particular interpretation and/or application of the Rule, then it is because they are somehow lacking, not because they simply haven't found the right expression of religious life for them and need to seek elsewhere.

 

This has been something I have been concerned about. Because the person in formation is the vulnerable party in the relationship --- there is a lot of potential for abuse. And even if there is not abuse or even anything deliberate -- that "group think" can be a powerful force that just steam rolls people. A disturbing (to me) example in my own case: I loved Harry Potter, but after I entered I found myself utterly convinced it was Satanic --because that was very much the party line. After I left one of the first things I did was pick up Sorcerer's Stone and I looked back in horror at what I'd "thought" about it. This was not an instance of abuse, just, imo, an example of the power of group psychology and the intense desire of a newcomer to "join up." Its bewildering to me to think back on the process by which my thinking was so dramatically altered. I think of myself as a rather strong minded person. Judgment around the character of Harry Potter literature is somewhat inconsequential but clearly there is an opportunity for abuse if anyone should take it up.

[AccountDeleted]

Hmmmm maybe you have not explicitly mentioned it -- so it is true that it is impossible for me to "know." I guess I could say I have a fairly strong impression, based on things that you have mentioned here and there about what you are doing and how I line those things up with my understanding of how religious life works. Feel free to confirm, correct, or ignore that impression. Re: the rest, I was only commenting on the thoughts you have shared on the phorum. I'm privy to those, as is the rest of the world.

 

 

 

Just to be clear, what you said was: 

 

 

 

Which is, in my opinion, incorrect. There are quite a few communities that do not send members to be with dying parents or for funerals, and their reasons are not automatically "invalid."  I mentioned the Carthusians. You probably know better than me - but from what I know the Missionaries of Charity see their families every 10 years or so - I mean their active Sisters. I knew a Sister whose father died and it wasn't possible for her to attend the funeral because of the observance of this rule.  In all honesty I don't know really what the reason for this rule is, but I think the presumption should be that it is a "valid" one. No doubt there are things about the M.C.s that could be improved but they are hardly a cult. 

 

 

This has been something I have been concerned about. Because the person in formation is the vulnerable party in the relationship --- there is a lot of potential for abuse. And even if there is not abuse or even anything deliberate -- that "group think" can be a powerful force that just steam rolls people. A disturbing (to me) example in my own case: I loved Harry Potter, but after I entered I found myself utterly convinced it was Satanic --because that was very much the party line. After I left one of the first things I did was pick up Sorcerer's Stone and I looked back in horror at what I'd "thought" about it. This was not an instance of abuse, just, imo, an example of the power of group psychology and the intense desire of a newcomer to "join up." Its bewildering to me to think back on the process by which my thinking was so dramatically altered. I think of myself as a rather strong minded person. Judgment around the character of Harry Potter literature is somewhat inconsequential but clearly there is an opportunity for abuse if anyone should take it up.

 

Thank you for your permission. I will ignore your impressions of my community and my thoughts and feelings as you are still not privy to them but you are certainly free to have whatever impression you want.

 

As for the MCs, I have actually lived and worked with them and yes, in many ways they are cult-like, and that is one reason why I decided not to apply to them after my time with them. That does not mean that I don't love them or admire their owrk, because I do, and it was Mother Teresa's own behavior with the dying that made me take an interest in the Catholic faith, and thus I attribute my conversion to her.

 

As for those communities that do not allow members to attend to dying parents or their funerals, I personally still cannot see any valid reason for this prohibition, although to those who consider entering such communities, it might not be an issue for them. It wasn't an issue for me because both of my parents are already dead.

 

I certainly don't know ALL of the various Rules of the Orders, but in St Albert's Rule, there is no prohibition against this, and there is certainly an indication that necessity is to be considered above the law, and that common sense should always apply. If it is the constitutions of a community that forbid it, then perhaps it is time for that community to re-evaluate their Constitutions as instructed by Vatican 2, to be more in alignment with the spirit of their founder/ress. If, after careful consideration and discussion amongst all of the communities of an Order, a decision is made to uphold this prohibition, then anyone entering should be fully informed about it, and then they can make their own well informed decision. If, as in the case of the Carmelites, there is disagreement amongst the communities, then we end up with situations like the OCD having two sets of Constitutions (the 1990 and the 1991). The O Carms have their own, different Constitutions yet again, as I am sure do the various other Carmelite communities like those that do active work caring for the elderly, missionary work etc.

 

I would like to comment further on your experience of 'group think' but it will have to wait as I am required by the schedule to be elsewhere right now.