Vegetarian Orders/communities?

[oremus1]

Can understand your decision in that scenario. In terms of discerning - I don't think I'd join a community who expected me to eat meat because they treat it like a child who refuses to eat their brussels! In reality, at least to me, it would feel more like someone killed my pet dog, put it on the BBQ and then expected me to eat it out of obedience to the community. That isn't going to happen with me, not unless we're in some post apololypse zombie world or something :joecool:

My view is that when a person is discerning with a community then the process is two way in working out if God wants them there. To me it's important to know that a community is willing to listen and understand where I'm coming from. To be willing to accept that I bring a new dynamic to the group, and that I may have specific positives/negatives and new ideas to bring. I don't think it's just about moulding to be like the community, but maintaining a sense of self as well in healthy proportion. If they say, point blank, that they'd not be willing to move on the food issue then I'd wonder what else about me would create a problem for this community.  To be honest I'd find it a bit insensitive and I'd be put off if a community knew what I believed, understood how I'd feel, and still didn't care enough to make a concession on what I was expected to eat. They'dend up missing out on all my recipes I could have shared with them  :cointoss:

 

 

This is exactly what I mean ^^^ especially the part about comparing a child not eating their Brussels with someone killing your pet dog and making you eat it out of odedience. So true. Being vegetarian is a deeply personal thing, it is not just being a fussy eater. there are emotional, spiritual and psychological elements, and for Religious to trivialise it is very sad indeed.

 

 

The communities I listed in my OP are not just 'tolerant' of vegetarians', they actually have it as part of their rules or constitutions that they specifically do not consume meat (unless someone has a health issue which means they must etc etc).

 

I was hoping people would add to my list. But clearly tjhey don't want to .

 

I am at least glad there is one other person who feels the same Benedictus, makes my thread worthwhile to know that I am not the only one.

[Antigonos]

I have a question. obviously, I presume there will be a variety of answers, but I'm hoping for a bit of clarification, nontheless.

There are two main ways of serving a meal to a group of people. One is buffet or cafeteria style, where a variety of dishes are presented and each person takes her choice. So, if there is a soup, a meat dish of some kind, and one or more vegetables and a starch, a person could theoretically make limited dietary choices.

The other way is to go around with a serving cart and just fill each plate with a bit of everything. I would expect that,in this situation, it might be "required" to eat everything, whether one wants to or not.

My question is, do most communities demand that a sister eat everything on offer? In a buffet, can one simply not take the meat (or the carbohydrate) and take a bit more veg, or is it a matter of obedience not to refuse anything?

[oremus1]

I have a question. obviously, I presume there will be a variety of answers, but I'm hoping for a bit of clarification, nontheless.

There are two main ways of serving a meal to a group of people. One is buffet or cafeteria style, where a variety of dishes are presented and each person takes her choice. So, if there is a soup, a meat dish of some kind, and one or more vegetables and a starch, a person could theoretically make limited dietary choices.

The other way is to go around with a serving cart and just fill each plate with a bit of everything. I would expect that,in this situation, it might be "required" to eat everything, whether one wants to or not.

My question is, do most communities demand that a sister eat everything on offer? In a buffet, can one simply not take the meat (or the carbohydrate) and take a bit more veg, or is it a matter of obedience not to refuse anything?

The one I visited made you a dinner in a can and left it outside your room. so I just picked off the meat and dumped it in the bin. but I did go hungry some of the time. and I did get tired from lack of protein. you cant just eat bread and carbs, you do need milk or cheese or som protein .  they knew I was vegetarian but that is a rare species.

[freedomreigns]

I feel like a real downer to keep bringing this back up, but the point of religious life is to conform oneself in obedience to the will of God as expressed through one's superior, rule and constitutions.  This means self-denial is intrinsic to the vocation, (as it actually is to the Christian life in general, but to a different degree and fashion in religious life.)  

 

Being expected to conform to the customs, (including dietary,) of the community does not mean being treated like a child.  It means freely giving up one's own judgment and will in a special participation in the obedience of Christ Whose "bread" was "to do the Will of the Father."  Communities are not out to make life difficult for their members, and many are able to make allowances for some personal preferences, but a certain flexibility on the part of the member is really important.  

 

Being able to make decisions for oneself is a "good."  This is a good freely sacrificed to God in religious life in the vow of obedience.  Being able to own things and provide for oneself and one's future is also a "good."  This is freely sacrificed to God in religious life in the vow of poverty.  Marriage and rightful use of one's sexuality and family life is also a "good."  This is freely sacrificed to God in religious life in the vow of chastity.  

 

I am still not trying to say that someone should not investigate communities that might be able to accommodate a person who wants to be a vegetarian.  I am trying to say that communities that are not willing or able to do so are not doing anything wrong or "insensitive" or "intolerant."  Religious life is not for everyone.  Taking on the sacrifices of religious life is a choice which must be freely made.

[oremus1]

I am still not trying to say that someone should not investigate communities that might be able to accommodate a person who wants to be a vegetarian.  I am trying to say that communities that are not willing or able to do so are not doing anything wrong or "insensitive" or "intolerant."  Religious life is not for everyone.  Taking on the sacrifices of religious life is a choice which must be freely made.

 

 

religious life and being vegetarian are not always mutually exclusive.

 

just because someone is vegetarian does not mean they are unsuited to religious life.

 

hence this thread of entire orders which actually oberve the discipline of vegetarianism.

 

a question for you. if your superior killed and cooked your beloved pet dog, and asked you to eat it out of obedience, would you? perhaps now you understand it is not about being a fussy eater or disobedient.

[freedomreigns]

I actually have not said at all that vegetarianism is about being fussy or disobedient.  (straw man?)

 

Religious communities are not obligated to bend to the will of potential members.  That does not make them insensitive, as one person suggested above, or intolerant.  

 

Did you notice the part where I said it is not wrong to research whether or not a person's dietary preferences would be possible in a particular community?  If not eating meat is super duper important to you, then obviously you shouldn't join a community where this would be a problem.  But the tone of a few posts, (perhaps not yours specifically,) made it sound like the problem was the community for expecting someone to conform to their customs and that is just not the case.

Edited July 15, 2014 by freedomreigns

[oremus1]

I actually have not said at all that vegetarianism is about being fussy or disobedient.  (straw man?)

 

Religious communities are not obligated to bend to the will of potential members.  That does not make them insensitive, as one person suggested above, or intolerant.  

 

Did you notice the part where I said it is not wrong to research whether or not a person's dietary preferences would be possible in a particular community?  If not eating meat is super duper important to you, then obviously you shouldn't join a community where this would be a problem.  But the tone of a few posts, (perhaps not yours specifically,) made it sound like the problem was the community for expecting someone to conform to their customs and that is just not the case.

 

 

This thread was just supposed to list communities which have vegetarianism as part of their rule.
apparently it was traditionally part of the Carmelites AND Benedictine rules.
 

[freedomreigns]

And I wish you the best in finding what you are looking for, and more importantly still for finding the Will of God for your vocation.  I personally don't know, but I suspect the Valparaiso Carmelites may abstain from meat.  Obviously I also don't know if you have a vocation to cloistered contemplative life, but they also usually have the traditional mass.

[oremus1]

And I wish you the best in finding what you are looking for, and more importantly still for finding the Will of God for your vocation.  I personally don't know, but I suspect the Valparaiso Carmelites may abstain from meat.  Obviously I also don't know if you have a vocation to cloistered contemplative life, but they also usually have the traditional mass.

They are amazing. I am not sure if they are vegetarian (I don't know) but they do indeed have traditional mass. Deo gratias, many thanks

[Benedictus]

I have a question. obviously, I presume there will be a variety of answers, but I'm hoping for a bit of clarification, nontheless.

There are two main ways of serving a meal to a group of people. One is buffet or cafeteria style, where a variety of dishes are presented and each person takes her choice. So, if there is a soup, a meat dish of some kind, and one or more vegetables and a starch, a person could theoretically make limited dietary choices.

The other way is to go around with a serving cart and just fill each plate with a bit of everything. I would expect that,in this situation, it might be "required" to eat everything, whether one wants to or not.

My question is, do most communities demand that a sister eat everything on offer? In a buffet, can one simply not take the meat (or the carbohydrate) and take a bit more veg, or is it a matter of obedience not to refuse anything?

 

It depends on the community. In apostolic or clerical orders they vary a great deal. Sometimes people cook their own meals or they take it in turns to shop, cook etc for eachother. It's probably easier in this situation to accomodate different diets.  In the monastic settings, at last the ones I know about, breakfast, and usually lunch, is buffet style (informal). But the main dinner tends to be served to you, and then they'll come around and add on additionals if you want. In some places it makes it easier to indicate you don't want certain vegetables, but obviously that isn't very helpful here.

Some communities have more than one main option available and will ask in advance (or know of preferences), others won't offer variations. As many monastic settings eat in silence you can't really say 'I can't eat this'. You can leave it but then you'll either be hungry or, if its available, eat the table bread/fruit instead. But this isn't viable in the long term. So you have to see beforehand what the setup is. I personally would find out before even arranging to go there to aviod this situation. I wouldn't retreat or discern there if this would be a major issue for them.   From what I can tell I was hardly ever the first person to ask these questions of communities. So many know it's a growing issue. But, at least for guests (probably less so for discerners) it's usually seen as part of their rule to be accomodating. But the miles on this will of course vary.
 

Edited July 16, 2014 by Benedictus

[Benedictus]

This is exactly what I mean ^^^ especially the part about comparing a child not eating their Brussels with someone killing your pet dog and making you eat it out of odedience. So true. Being vegetarian is a deeply personal thing, it is not just being a fussy eater. there are emotional, spiritual and psychological elements, and for Religious to trivialise it is very sad indeed.

 

 

The communities I listed in my OP are not just 'tolerant' of vegetarians', they actually have it as part of their rules or constitutions that they specifically do not consume meat (unless someone has a health issue which means they must etc etc).

 

I was hoping people would add to my list. But clearly tjhey don't want to .

 

I am at least glad there is one other person who feels the same Benedictus, makes my thread worthwhile to know that I am not the only one.

 

The problem is some communities, even within the same order, will accomodate whereas other won't. It very much depedns on their ideas and how willing they are to discern with you. I would imagine some orders that generally have vegetarian diets would find it easier to meet the needs of vegetarian or vegan discerners and guests. But, as some have pointed out, there can be situations where things may need to be clarified around this. As many don't have ethical reasons for not eating meat they'd be happy to eat it if they could. They may also not see certain stock gravy or other products with animal contents as a problem. But, with some will, these things can be overcome. Once you make it to being an integrated member of the community then it's likely that they'll adjust or embrace the situation until it becomes second nature to them. Where there's a will there's a way :flex2:
 

[Benedictus]

I feel like a real downer to keep bringing this back up, but the point of religious life is to conform oneself in obedience to the will of God as expressed through one's superior, rule and constitutions.  This means self-denial is intrinsic to the vocation, (as it actually is to the Christian life in general, but to a different degree and fashion in religious life.)  

 

Being expected to conform to the customs, (including dietary,) of the community does not mean being treated like a child.  It means freely giving up one's own judgment and will in a special participation in the obedience of Christ Whose "bread" was "to do the Will of the Father."  Communities are not out to make life difficult for their members, and many are able to make allowances for some personal preferences, but a certain flexibility on the part of the member is really important.  

 

Being able to make decisions for oneself is a "good."  This is a good freely sacrificed to God in religious life in the vow of obedience.  Being able to own things and provide for oneself and one's future is also a "good."  This is freely sacrificed to God in religious life in the vow of poverty.  Marriage and rightful use of one's sexuality and family life is also a "good."  This is freely sacrificed to God in religious life in the vow of chastity.  

 

I am still not trying to say that someone should not investigate communities that might be able to accommodate a person who wants to be a vegetarian.  I am trying to say that communities that are not willing or able to do so are not doing anything wrong or "insensitive" or "intolerant."  Religious life is not for everyone.  Taking on the sacrifices of religious life is a choice which must be freely made.

 

Yes, but surely it would be proportional, with compassion and realistic. I personally don't think God would call me to such a community, and this has been shown to be true so far. I don't understand why communities would want to lose discerners over matters such as this, especially on ethical matters and conscience issues that aren't against Catholic doctrine.
It doesn't makes sense to make the process more hard than it needs to be for people. Cultural and global influences, ethical decisions and wider factors in the world will be important things for a community or order to consider. Training a novice according to the order is to be expected. But using such reasons to make someone break an ethical precept they belive in makes no sense. It's not comparable to seeking to keep ones own preferences or giving up treats.  Many communities aren't really in a position anymore to be complacent or dismissive, especially if the person would be an excellent candidate on all other points. I'm sure in years gone by such requests or diets were less common, so communities had no need to think about it or get drawn on the topic. But things change, and I'm sure the kitchen could cope with a little more diversity :blues:

[oremus1]

Yes, but surely it would be proportional, with compassion and realistic. I personally don't think God would call me to such a community, and this has been shown to be true so far. I don't understand why communities would want to lose discerners over matters such as this, especially on ethical matters and conscience issues that aren't against Catholic doctrine.
It doesn't makes sense to make the process more hard than it needs to be for people. Cultural and global influences, ethical decisions and wider factors in the world will be important things for a community or order to consider. Training a novice according to the order is to be expected. But using such reasons to make someone break an ethical precept they belive in makes no sense. It's not comparable to seeking to keep ones own preferences or giving up treats.  Many communities aren't really in a position anymore to be complacent or dismissive, especially if the person would be an excellent candidate on all other points. I'm sure in years gone by such requests or diets were less common, so communities had no need to think about it or get drawn on the topic. But things change, and I'm sure the kitchen could cope with a little more diversity :blues:

^^^ this, exactly.

also, probably the convent woudl save money by going veggie. and they can have a clear consceince that they have not partaken in death or undue suffering of those smaller than them. as well as contributing to sustainability.

I would also like to share:

I am baffled by this omnivorous order in this photo,  do they eat the lamb afterward?why dont they feel guilty?:

https://www.facebook.com/icksp/photos/pb.82895233704.-2207520000.1405598605./10152186810988705/?type=3&theater 

Carthusian statutes:

  5 In accordance with the practice introduced by our first Fathers and ever since observed with remarkable zeal, we exclude all eating and taking of meat from our way of life. This abstinence is to be observed as a distinguishing mark of the Order and as a sign of hermit austerity, in which, with God’s help, we intend to persevere.

Deo gratias!!

[blazeingstar]

religious life and being vegetarian are not always mutually exclusive.

 

just because someone is vegetarian does not mean they are unsuited to religious life.

 

hence this thread of entire orders which actually oberve the discipline of vegetarianism.

 

a question for you. if your superior killed and cooked your beloved pet dog, and asked you to eat it out of obedience, would you? perhaps now you understand it is not about being a fussy eater or disobedient.

 

Yes, I would.  

 

I think what you are showing is a hightened level of selfishness and wanting it all.  Do you think people who discern marriage don't also go through this?

 

I know couples who are split vegeterian/meat eater.  Its a hard row to hoe between what they each eat, cooking meals that please both, ensuring each has the right foods and then when you complicate that by 3-6 kids all deciding they'd rather be vegetarian when they decide the chicken looks gross, or rather be meat eaters when mushrooms are served, it's quite the disaster.  I can understand when one convent/monistary would say, nope, not dealing with it.

 

Also, my friend who's a nun takes turns cooking....and even for a dozen people it's quite the endevor.  Not everyone is pleased with every meal, but they all eat so that no Sister feels like a bad cook.

 

And, being a aware shopper and eating meat in a reasonable way will save money.  Where I live being entirely vegeterian and getting enough from nuts, etc, is very pricy.

Edited July 17, 2014 by blazeingstar

[oremus1]

Yes, I would.  

 

I think what you are showing is a hightened level of selfishness and wanting it all.  Do you think people who discern marriage don't also go through this?

 

I know couples who are split vegeterian/meat eater.  Its a hard row to hoe between what they each eat, cooking meals that please both, ensuring each has the right foods and then when you complicate that by 3-6 kids all deciding they'd rather be vegetarian when they decide the chicken looks gross, or rather be meat eaters when mushrooms are served, it's quite the disaster.  I can understand when one convent/monistary would say, nope, not dealing with it.

 

Also, my friend who's a nun takes turns cooking....and even for a dozen people it's quite the endevor.  Not everyone is pleased with every meal, but they all eat so that no Sister feels like a bad cook.

 

And, being a aware shopper and eating meat in a reasonable way will save money.  Where I live being entirely vegeterian and getting enough from nuts, etc, is very pricy.

 

this is so ridiculous. so you are saying those religious who WOULDNT kill and eat their pet dog out of obedience are selfish? i call it having a conscience.

 

what about the many saints who founded orders which were vegetarian? are those saints selfish?

 

what about penitential vegetarianism , mandatory on fridays in some countries. is that frivolous??

if i was discerning marriage, i would not date someone who expected me to cook meat. there are many vegetarian men out there. why would i date a barbarian whose values are so different to my own.

 

i suppose it is the same for choosing a community.

 

and no. being vegetarian is not more expensive than eating meat. rice and beans is a staple in many developing nations. and i highly doubt orders like the franciscans (founded by St Francis who was, SHOCK HORROR vegetarian!!!) who especially obverve poverty  would observe vegetarianism if it was somehow a luxury.