impediments to religious life question

[MarysLittleFlower]

I read that a person can't be a nun if she's married or had a divorce (in which case of course she's still married unless she had an annulment and the marriage was invalid). Why is this? Is this because she has a human spouse and being a nun is like a spiritual marriage in spirituality? (Distinct from CVs and mystical spiritual marriage - the latter being for any vocation). However penitents can be nuns if they are not married and never were, right? Because they never had a spouse even though they may have lost their virginity? I'm asking this because the topic sort of came up elsewhere. I've never been married but I'm also a convert with a past so I'm trying to understand. Thanks!

Edited June 3, 2015 by MarysLittleFlower

[truthfinder]

Not at all.  Many communities will take a woman who has had an annulment (provided that she doesn't have minor children or children at all).  I know of one community which has consulted a canon lawyer and are of the opinion that an annulment isn't need at all (which would have some historical precedence of seperating a Catholic marriage in order to follow the 'higher' vocation - as a nun or priest/monk).  

This is very community specific.  

[tnavarro61]

I am not very knowledgeable with the nuns' rule, but in the Rule of Saint Francis, married men may enter the Order after consulting the bishop, and after discussing with his spouse of course. I know of a friar who was a father and is now a father, his wife is now a nun.

I know of a sister who was a housewife. Her children are all grown ups.

There are communities who may take women who were married. There are others who will not. It depends on each community.

[TheresaThoma]

I think mostly the whole married question is that the religious vocation and the vocation to married life are two distinct vocations. There is also this section of Canon law regarding admitance to the novitiate.

Can. 643 §1. The following are admitted to the novitiate invalidly:

1/ one who has not yet completed seventeen years of age;

2/ a spouse, while the marriage continues to exist;

So if a person is in a valid marriage, ie the spouse is still alive or there is not an annulment granted they cannot enter religious life.

However the other case that you mention about someone who has never had a spouse but has lost their virginity is different. There is a quote that says every Saint has a past and every sinner has a future. There would need to be some discernment on the part of the potential candidate since chastity is one of the vows.The community would naturally want to know that you are capable of living a chaste life but just because you had a time in your life that you were unchaste doesn't mean that you would automatically be disqualified for religious life. Remember that St Augustine prior to his conversion was most definitely not chaste and even fathered an illegitimate son. 

[Sister Leticia]

All sorts of people enter religious life, with all sorts of life experiences which can both help and hinder their growth in living the vows and living in community and so on. When it comes to chastity it isn't just a question of whether a person is still a virgin or not. For example, s/he might be a virgin, but maybe s/he grew up in a cold, loveless family, and even in adulthood has never learnt how to form healthy, warm, loving relationships, and how to appropriately give and receive affection, which is a huge part of the vow of chastity. Whereas the candidate who was once sexually active might also be naturally loving, generous and empathetic, and better able to cope with the affective demands of chastity.

The marriage question is different, because it is a canonical requirement that candidates are not in a valid marriage, just as they shouldn't have dependent children or other commitments they couldn't fulfil as religious.

 

[Nunsuch]

In my studies of the history of (women's) religious life in the US, I have identified at least 4 divorced foundresses, and two unwed mothers. The first American-born saint (Elizabeth Ann Seton) was of course a widow. These rumors are simply that--rumors. And totally untrue.  At least one of the divorced founders, by the way, has been proposed for sainthood.

[MarysLittleFlower]

In my studies of the history of (women's) religious life in the US, I have identified at least 4 divorced foundresses, and two unwed mothers. The first American-born saint (Elizabeth Ann Seton) was of course a widow. These rumors are simply that--rumors. And totally untrue.  At least one of the divorced founders, by the way, has been proposed for sainthood.

Thanks for the replies!

I'm trying to understand how this relates to the Canon Law ? Did the foundresses maybe have annulments? It says - while the marriage continues to exist... If it never existed or if the person is a widow then that's another case... Is this a possible idea? Or is there another one?

[truthfinder]

Thanks for the replies!

I'm trying to understand how this relates to the Canon Law ? Did the foundresses maybe have annulments? It says - while the marriage continues to exist... If it never existed or if the person is a widow then that's another case... Is this a possible idea? Or is there another one?

​As I've stated, there was at least one foundresses who had the marriage dissolved.  This is not an annulment.  It's very rare and only done when both parties agree and are going to pursue religious vocations.  I'm not sure about current canon law, but there would have been different canons at the time. 

[Benedictus]

​

Thanks for the replies!

I'm trying to understand how this relates to the Canon Law ? Did the foundresses maybe have annulments? It says - while the marriage continues to exist... If it never existed or if the person is a widow then that's another case... Is this a possible idea? Or is there another one?

​For my novitiate process I had to read the requirements, write them out and sign them as part of the application. There are additional rules for those to be clerics. It focused on the canon requirements that were apart of the constitutions also.  The latest Canon law comes from 1983, it may have been different beforehand. What I do know though is that religious orders, especially before Vatican ll had different roles and avenues for joining communities. Some, I would guess, had different rules and responsibilities. For example, some may have been lay extern religious or associates, oblates and so on. There are religious institutes now that have priests, religious brothers and sisters, and married couples that are consecrated into the institute according to the evangelical promises, according to their state of life. The latter aren't 'religious' in the general sense but it's an example of how arrangements and diversity can exist within institutes or communities.

There are also Societies of Apostolic life. Members of these don't usually take religious vows but they can wear habits. The Daughters of Charity take annual vows during their lives, as an example. But they could decide to remove this requirement if they desired in their constitutions.

[Sr Mary Catharine OP]

The requirement of an annulment started with the 83 code of canon law. Before that you just needed to be legally separated and the agreement of the other spouse, because of course, divorce is not recognized by the Church. An annulment was not required. But it is now.

[puellapaschalis]

The requirement of an annulment started with the 83 code of canon law. Before that you just needed to be legally separated and the agreement of the other spouse, because of course, divorce is not recognized by the Church. An annulment was not required. But it is now.

​That is really interesting, Sister. Thanks.

[MarysLittleFlower]

The requirement of an annulment started with the 83 code of canon law. Before that you just needed to be legally separated and the agreement of the other spouse, because of course, divorce is not recognized by the Church. An annulment was not required. But it is now.

​that is interesting and i didn't know that! i wonder why it changed.