Admissions Process For Women's Orders?

[OnlySunshine]

Re psyche exams........any exam is a snapshot only, of that moment and that time.

 

For years and years people entered Religious Life without any of these exams or tests, and most stayed!

 

I think the best way of evaluating a person is face to face. If distance is involved then we do have other means, especially in todays media driven world. For cloistered communities, then they can use the same systems they have over hundreds of years, snail (or e) mail, telephone, visits - even if these are infrequent and take place towards the end of the getting to know you process and rather nearer the entering point.

 

Psyche evals are given far too much weight.

 

In the past, Postulancy was a trial - a try out. These days when it is much more common for people to give it a go in several commnities and this is much more acceptable, I can't see why we can't leave out the psyche eval altogether. I know it is supposed to weed out those who have a definite mental health issue, but actually, these evaluations are not that terribly good at doing that! In the process, some of those who have a genuine calling and may have done absolutely fine in a given community have been turned away........

 

The old methods are the best, IMO.

 

I totally agree.  My pastor is the one that referred me to the religious community.  He knows me very well and knows that I'm involved in several activities in the Church.  However, the religious community desired me to have a psych exam and I NEVER filled out a formal application like I did with the first community I applied to.  I never met Mother General because she lives in Europe so all she saw were my test results.  Her native language is not English so I don't even know how well she comprehended the test results.  That was earlier this year and I've learned that it worked out for the best because I am loving school and I'm happy.  I LOVE the community still but I do believe there is an intercultural barrier.  The two American postulants (one is a 2nd year novice now) have to learn the language and adapt to the Motherhouse which the novice seems to be doing a great job of.  The postulant is still in the USA and will be transferred next year to Europe.

 

It's just generally a good idea to stick with native communities because of the cultural differences.  People can have the best intentions but misread things thinking they are a bigger problem than they really are. 

[NotreDame]

Thanks everyone for the replies.  It does appear that the admissions process is a bit more streamlined for women than for men and, while it's a bit disconerting to me, I guess it does make some sense.   A priest is a more formal designation in the church who will be presented as an authority figure to the lay faithful and public and will be interfacing with many people - a contemplative would not be in the same position.  

 

I will point out that, while some of these exams may seem tedious to the applicant, they can serve a purpose.   Beyond helping the superiors decide whether you are in a proper mental/emotional state to make a decision on entering, a screening can actually protect both the applicant and other religious already there.  Even if you don't have any pyschological issues yourself, it helps make sure the others you'll be living with don't - or if they do, that they are on the proper medication and those who need to know are aware of it and can help if the condition worsens.   Having seen folks go off medication in close quarters, it can be a very difficult and painful situation. 

 

Again, thanks for all the replies.

 

[maximillion]

I just deleted what I was going to post on the grounds of it being too confrontational. I just KNOW that stigma exists against people with MH issues, and it is alive and kicking in Religious Life too, sadly.

 

I don't want to turn this into a confrontational debate, but TBH most psyche evals are not worth the paper they are printed on. If someone is so rampantly ill as to be excluded from RL then you can bet most people would pick that up, you don't need a psyche eval to do so.

 

I know of at least one situation where someone was sent away from a convent purely on the strength of the psyche eval that was carried out before Clothing. That same person is happy and settled in a different Carmel now, and I know she will not be the first or the last - sadly.

 

We ALL have mental health issues, to a greater or lesser extent. It becomes a problem only when it becomes a problem!

 

I suppose I feel strongly because I personally know people who have been very wrongly judged over this.

The day we abandon this rubbish testing can't come too soon for me!

[NotreDame]

Maximillion,  I appreciate your opinion.  Please don't be upset if I don't share your POV.  If you looked closer you'd see I'm not necessarily disagreeing with everything or even anything you say. 

 

You are looking at it from the standpoint of someone who wants to enter, but can't because of a psych eval.  That's only one point of view in one of many possible scenarios.   There are many other situations that act in everyone's favor, such as where a psych eval could help protect the candidate while still allowing them to move forward. 

 

Think about someone who is, perhaps, bipolar and requires medication to avoid severe manic episodes.  My favorite parish priest had that condition, so I personally don't believe it alone should be a barrier, per se.  Still, if someone enters a seminary (especially via a religious congregation where the rule might impact many aspects of their daily life) it's important that the rector/superior and the seminarian are both aware that the other are aware of the condition and the fact that it needs to be medicated - and that certain aspects of religious life could exacerbate the condition if not careful (ie. lack of sleep.) 

 

This is just one example, but there are many others where a psychological eval ensures that certain things are dealt with openly to the benefit of the all parties.  That doesn't mean that all evals are effective, or that all parties deal with the results properly, or that a person denied admittance at one place shouldn't be able to be successful at another (after all, different congregations have different charisms sometimes requiring different things.) Yet neither should it surprise or offend anyone if entering religious life is difficult.  One only has to review the lives of the saints to see how much difficulty many of them had entering.

 

Regardless of whether you think it's fair, these psych evals are pretty much mandatory for men's seminaries in the US and it shouldn't be unreasonable for someone to agree with the Church's practices in this area.

 

[OnlySunshine]

Maximillion,  I appreciate your opinion.  Please don't be upset if I don't share your POV.  If you looked closer you'd see I'm not necessarily disagreeing with everything or even anything you say. 

 

You are looking at it from the standpoint of someone who wants to enter, but can't because of a psych eval.  That's only one point of view in one of many possible scenarios.   There are many other situations that act in everyone's favor, such as where a psych eval could help protect the candidate while still allowing them to move forward. 

 

Think about someone who is, perhaps, bipolar and requires medication to avoid severe manic episodes.  My favorite parish priest had that condition, so I personally don't believe it alone should be a barrier, per se.  Still, if someone enters a seminary (especially via a religious congregation where the rule might impact many aspects of their daily life) it's important that the rector/superior and the seminarian are both aware that the other are aware of the condition and the fact that it needs to be medicated - and that certain aspects of religious life could exacerbate the condition if not careful (ie. lack of sleep.) 

 

This is just one example, but there are many others where a psychological eval ensures that certain things are dealt with openly to the benefit of the all parties.  That doesn't mean that all evals are effective, or that all parties deal with the results properly, or that a person denied admittance at one place shouldn't be able to be successful at another (after all, different congregations have different charisms sometimes requiring different things.) Yet neither should it surprise or offend anyone if entering religious life is difficult.  One only has to review the lives of the saints to see how much difficulty many of them had entering.

 

Regardless of whether you think it's fair, these psych evals are pretty much mandatory for men's seminaries in the US and it shouldn't be unreasonable for someone to agree with the Church's practices in this area.

 

I understand that they are required for seminaries and I can definitely see why.  However, they aren't mandatory for candidates in religious life.  If you look at Canon Law that talks about novitiate, it only asks for sufficient health and it doesn't specify whether a person has to be off medication or not.  They leave that up to the individual communities.  The problem is that most of the communities that test have had problems in the past and they use the test on everyone because of it.  That is a bit problematic, in my view.  Just because a community had a problem in the past doesn't mean the next person that comes in is going to cause a problem.  Each person is different.

 

You'd be surprised to learn that there is a Sister in the Daughters of St. Paul that has bipolar disorder and has written books about dealing with mental health.  She's been with the community many years so it CAN be done.  There is a difference between manageable depression and full-blown schizophrenia with psychosis.  :)
 

[Sister Marie]

Sometimes communities require these tests not for admissions purposes but for formation purposes too.  Even though the psychological happens before entrance and as part of the application there are a lot of communities who use the results of the test to help the candidate during formation and not as a test to pass to see if they can enter.  All of us have things to work on and it helps the candidate know what they need to work on as well as what are going to be some potential difficulties and strengths as they move through formation.  

 

Religious life is difficult.  Formation is really difficult.  Both carry a lot of blessings and joy but both make you face yourself in a very stark and brutally honest way and any problems that exist outside of them will be magnified in the novitiate or in religious life.  It's good to be prepared to face those things instead of being blindsided when they arise and then having no information or background with which to look at your issues (which all of us have).  In communities where psychological testing is used as a formative tool, the sister should be able to look back and say something like "Well, no wonder I'm feeling so anxious all the time.  It came up in my psychological that I really like order and I'm working with this sister who is disorganized and is in charge and I don't know how to do this job under these circumstances.  Maybe I can talk to her or the superior about how I can best handle this situation." instead of saying "What is happening?!  I'm so anxious and I don't know why."  The first situation can be dealt with.  In the second, the sister might continue to suffer, bottle up what she is feeling because she doesn't understand it, become withdrawn or depressed... etc...

 

That's a really simplistic explanation but that is how a lot of communities use psychological assessments and it seems to be both helpful to the candidate and to the community.  

[OnlySunshine]

Sometimes communities require these tests not for admissions purposes but for formation purposes too.  Even though the psychological happens before entrance and as part of the application there are a lot of communities who use the results of the test to help the candidate during formation and not as a test to pass to see if they can enter.  All of us have things to work on and it helps the candidate know what they need to work on as well as what are going to be some potential difficulties and strengths as they move through formation.  

 

Religious life is difficult.  Formation is really difficult.  Both carry a lot of blessings and joy but both make you face yourself in a very stark and brutally honest way and any problems that exist outside of them will be magnified in the novitiate or in religious life.  It's good to be prepared to face those things instead of being blindsided when they arise and then having no information or background with which to look at your issues (which all of us have).  In communities where psychological testing is used as a formative tool, the sister should be able to look back and say something like "Well, no wonder I'm feeling so anxious all the time.  It came up in my psychological that I really like order and I'm working with this sister who is disorganized and is in charge and I don't know how to do this job under these circumstances.  Maybe I can talk to her or the superior about how I can best handle this situation." instead of saying "What is happening?!  I'm so anxious and I don't know why."  The first situation can be dealt with.  In the second, the sister might continue to suffer, bottle up what she is feeling because she doesn't understand it, become withdrawn or depressed... etc...

 

That's a really simplistic explanation but that is how a lot of communities use psychological assessments and it seems to be both helpful to the candidate and to the community.  

 

Yes, this is how my friend's community used the test - to gauge what her strengths and weaknesses were before she entered the order.  The psychologist warned her that she'd probably be really homesick and, guess what?!?  She was.  But she knew to prepare for it and it made all the difference.  She knew she'd be able to move past it. 

 

I like this way of using the test.  I'd also think that if a community was told by a candidate, truthfully, that she had depression but was dealing with it and was able to function normally, they should give her a chance.  Speaking from personal experience, I've been turned away by so many communities even before they got to know me all because I wanted to be honest and upfront.  There are some exceptions, though, like the first community I applied to.  They would have allowed me to enter but the apostolate of working with children was not right for me.  I'm more suited for healthcare and realized it wasn't the community God was calling me to.  There were other factors at play there, too, but this was the main one.

 

I really don't hold a grudge against any of these communities but I definitely could see where improvements can be made so it doesn't seem like community is so judgmental towards mental health issues that are manageable.  I think there is still stigma attached to it by both religious communities and the lay world. 

[Graciela]

I have done psych evals twice- once for a cloistered community and once for an active community. I found the first to be rather laughable as the religious sister who did the evaluation had studied in Rome and had very narrow ideas that were not up to date with recent psychological research knowledge.  The second time was fine and I gained a few insights from it that was helpful for self-knowledge.

 

What seems to me to be only just, though i realize it would never happen, would be that the candidate/postulant be given a psych evaluation of the cloistered community they are entering, since they get one of the candidate.  Cloistered communities can be weird in their psychologies, Most older nuns never had to have psychological evaluation and may well have been subjected to punitive and humiliating formation practices that they now mimic in interacting with new members. Those nuns who entered right out of high school and were formed with a "whatever rev. mother says, goes" notion of obedience may well be affronted or threatened by professional women who enter formation with an adult identity and competence in making decisions.  Here is a simple example: I was stunned to be told that I could "change in to a clean blouse tomorrow" by the novice mistress when I was a new postulant.  I was an experienced professional nurse in my mid-twenties before entering, so it never even occurred to me that I would be told when to change to a clean blouse...    Fortunately I was so stunned that I just mumbled "thank you Sister" rather than blurting out that I had put on a clean blouse that morning and was quite used to dressing myself.  I did not last long there before I decided to leave and return to the late 20th century!

 

 

[AccountDeleted]

I have done psych evals twice- once for a cloistered community and once for an active community. I found the first to be rather laughable as the religious sister who did the evaluation had studied in Rome and had very narrow ideas that were not up to date with recent psychological research knowledge.  The second time was fine and I gained a few insights from it that was helpful for self-knowledge.

 

What seems to me to be only just, though i realize it would never happen, would be that the candidate/postulant be given a psych evaluation of the cloistered community they are entering, since they get one of the candidate.  Cloistered communities can be weird in their psychologies, Most older nuns never had to have psychological evaluation and may well have been subjected to punitive and humiliating formation practices that they now mimic in interacting with new members. Those nuns who entered right out of high school and were formed with a "whatever rev. mother says, goes" notion of obedience may well be affronted or threatened by professional women who enter formation with an adult identity and competence in making decisions.  Here is a simple example: I was stunned to be told that I could "change in to a clean blouse tomorrow" by the novice mistress when I was a new postulant.  I was an experienced professional nurse in my mid-twenties before entering, so it never even occurred to me that I would be told when to change to a clean blouse...    Fortunately I was so stunned that I just mumbled "thank you Sister" rather than blurting out that I had put on a clean blouse that morning and was quite used to dressing myself.  I did not last long there before I decided to leave and return to the late 20th century!

 

 

You make some really good points there Graciela.

 

Another phenomenon that I have observed is that those in formation will manage to 'hold it together' until they get to Solemn Profession, at which time they can't be sent away, and that is when they start to exhibit symptoms of psychological distress. The number of professed Carmelites that I have seen who either exhibit behavioral or psychological problems, or who suddenly have to start seeing therapists after making final vows is amazing. I call it the 'black veil syndrome'. :)

 

In small communities this obviously has an effect on everyone. I don't think this means that a psych eval would have changed anything. I think it means that for many of the older cloistered communities, their ideas of formation are so outdated as to contribute to psychological problems that are unconsciously being held in check until the person feels safe enough (after Solemn Profession) to express them. Combine this syndrome with the mental state of those older nuns who 'have been subjected to punitive and humiliating formation practices' and you end up with a very dysfunctional community. So even if a person passes their psych eval to get into the community, whether or not they maintain that psychological health depends a lot on the formation process and on the psychological health of the community itself.

 

I think that one of the key problems in today's convents is the conflict between the pre-Vatican 2 concept of total obedience that precluded a woman from expressing any independent thought or discretion and today's entrants, who have been raised in a society where women are independent and often coming from responsible and professional occupations. The Jesuits once said 'give me a boy before he's 5 and he's mine for life'. This is basically why convents in the past have always wanted young women - those who have not had life experience and who have been dependent on their parents to make decisions for them. After Vatican 2, obedience took on a whole new meaning and understanding, but a lot of the cloistered communities did not take this on board, keeping their old and rigid view of the vow. There is still the idea in some communities that humiliation can lead to humility, where in fact, it often leads to suppressed resentment, bitterness and secretiveness. Just because a person can say 'Yes Sister' does not mean that their mind and heart have also said this. We are told that if we want to be saints, we have to just endure it when someone treats us badly or accuses us of something we did not do. This will make us humble. My response, from being a psych nurse of 20 plus years is  'bullfeathers'. Psychological abuse is psychological abuse - in a convent or outside. A convent should be a place of love and support for the 'friends of Jesus', our Sisters, not a place where we have to learn how to endure years of psychological and verbal abuse in one form or another before we are 'safe' with the black veil. Sure, the convent is the front line of a spiritual battle, but treating each other badly looks more like giving comfort and aid to the enemy, Satan, rather than supporting our troops.

 

Going back to the application process: There have always been exceptions to the 'young and untried' applicant of course. St Teresa Benedicta of the Cross is one example of a more mature and experienced pre Vat 2 woman who was able to navigate her way through the  rigid formation process and still keep her independent mind and spirit intact but she was an exceptional woman as well as a saint. On the whole, the women in the past came from a society where the rigid formation process in cloistered communities was not much different than the society in which they lived -so the internal conflict was not as great - difficult yes, but not really unexpected.

 

But there are still many women in cloistered convents today who went through pre Vat 2 formation and were damaged. They express this through their behavior and attitudes, and their inability to accept change. Many of these damaged women are now in positions of authority, and what was good enough for them is good enough for today's woman, even if there is evidence to the contrary. So until those in in authority now either change their attitude (not likely but not impossible either) or leave their office for a younger woman, it will take time before all the unhealthy formation practices change completely. The real danger to the communities is that before that happens, they will 'die out' from lack of vocations that persevere. It isn't that cloistered communities can't get vocations - it's that they can't keep them.

 

If this happened in the corporate world (new employees who don't stay) - the company would have to look long and hard at why they couldn't keep people by examining their workplace practices. This doesn't happen in a lot of the older cloistered communities where they tend to blame the postulant or Novice who is usually told that she either doesn't have a vocation or that she isn't humble enough or some other reason for her leaving or being asked to leave.

 

Visitations of cloistered communities happen and recommendations are made, but the old attitudes and practices are protected as if they are the charism of the community, rather than just the means to live out that charism. At one community where I lived, the Visitation pointed out that if one was going to use the old triangle method of viewing hierarchy, with point up position of the Prioress at the top and the community at the bottom, then it should have changed after Vat 2 to reflect the new attitude that the triangle was standing on its point, with the community being at the top and the Prioress being at the bottom, to serve the community. In fact, the whole triangle view is outdated and something more inclusive like a circle should be used. Yes, the Prioress is Christ in the community, but the Christ who came to serve, washing the feet of His disciples as an example of how we should use authority given to us by God.

 

I know this is a bit of a rant, and probably TLDR, but it's ironic that communities spend so much time and money on the selection process with all their psych evals, and yet they spend so little time or money on evaluating how to protect the psychological health of those applicants after they enter.

 

And because I hate to finish on a negative note, I will add that there are new and flourishing communities - and even some older communities that have made the leap into this century and found the balance between obedience and individuality in their communities. If some of the communities that are dying out would turn and look to these successful communities and ask for help in developing healthy formation practices, they would be doing themselves a big favor. To start though, maybe they should give a psych eval to everyone in their community to see if anyone there would pass!   Or maybe give psych evals to anyone who wants to be a superior -- that might give some really interesting results! :P

 

Sorry for straying from the OP a little. Got carried away. :)

[Antigonos]

Nunsense, I can't give you props, but I think the points you've made are extremely important.

[maximillion]

I really value your input nunsense and think there are many very good points you have raised.

 

I too agree that it is a pointless expense and needless trial to do a psyche eval then put a person in a psychologically unhealthy situation!

 

However, I have had my say re the evals and won't say more.

 

 

[NotreDame]

Nunsense,  you make a lot of very good points.  My concern and questions about the potential for pyschological abuse of wounded candidates I heard about from friends is actually why I asked the question.  Thank you.

[emma8201986]

Here is something that has troubled me for some time - and this appears to be an appropriate discussion area in which to raise it.  When I was in college, I wasn't really sure what I wanted to do and went to the guidance office.  I took something called a "Strong Interest Inventory Profile."  In a nutshell, it measures your interests and suitability for various careers.   In the area of "Religion and Spiritually" I scored only in the low middle - in other areas, my scores were much higher.  I worry that this indicates that, by personality and inclination, I am not really suited for religious life and will never succeed, no matter how much I try.  In fact, if it wasn't for this, I probably would have entered this year.  I have a friend who took this test with me (it's not a test, but I'll just call it that).  The top career for her came up Military.  This woman NEVER considered the military - no one in her family was ever in service and, frankly, she is a bit of a pacifist.  Long story short - she joined the Navy and loves it.  Have anyone else had this experience?

[maximillion]

All I can say about on line 'tests' like this is they are worth even less than the ones done by psychologists. Again, it is a snapshot, a moment in time relating to you in that moment and little more. Basing ones life choices and ruling things out on the basis of one is IMO a bit foolhardy.

 

 

More to the point, where is God in your deliberations. What about what He wants. There is no online test for His Will!

 

Prayer and a good SD will be a better choice every time!

[emma8201986]

I appreciate the feedback, Max, but let me clarify.  This was not an online test.  It was done under the supervision of the guidance office psychologist and I had to pay a not insignificant sum for the test and reviewing the results.  The psychologist said that it was the result of many years of research and served as an indicator of a person's interests and suitability for various careers.  The fact that my friend has been so happy in a career she would never have considered makes me think that there is some validity to the results.  I realize that God is not factored at all into the equation but it sure makes me wonder how other people who have been happy in religious life would have scored.  I imagine that there are certain personality traits common to people who can adept to community life; a life of sacrifice for others and the difficulties of religious life.  I know there are those on this forum who say that if you feel called by God, trust in Him.  I wish I found it that easy.