What's The Difference Between A Nun And A Sister? (if Any?)

[Sister_Laurel]

[quote name='nunsense' date='08 April 2009 - 11:34 AM' timestamp='1239215644' post='1828948']
This is a very good question and one that I have asked for some time (I had a non-valid marriage so was enquiring about single consecration as opposed to consecrated virgin).

I was told by a canonist that the canons allow for consecrated virgins and widows, but not women whose marriages have been annuled or invalid. Perhaps this is because in the past, such things as annulments were rare.

And yet, here on phatmass, I heard about one woman who calls herself a "consecrated single" because she does not want to focus on her sexuality but on her consecration. I suppose that one's Bishop can accept public vows from anyone he chooses, but I don't know for sure. Of course, anyone can take private vows (married or single), so I am mainly talking about public vows of consecration here.
[/quote]

The new canons (603, 604, 605) allow for publicly professed solitary hermits and (non professed) consecrated virgins while 605 asks Bishops to be aware of and open to new forms of consecrated life. My understanding is that Rome must agree, however, before the Bishop consecrates someone under Canon 605. While I have heard of Consecrated Widows, there is no Canon referring to this and one canonist I have spoken with disagrees there is any such thing canonically. Finally, women who have been divorced and received an anullment may become publicly professed hermits or religious women (women in religious community) but not consecrated virgins. (Virginity and celibacy are different realities.) There is no category canonically called "consecrated single." Private vows do not admit one to the consecrated state. Public vows are required for that, partly because the rite of public profession involves the mediation of the call (God's own call to the person) by the Church. Private vows are best thought of as refering to dedication of self by the person making the vows (a significant act!), while public vows involve not just the dedication of the person herself, but her consecration by God --- the setting "apart" (or admission) of the person in/to the consecrated state.

[Cherie]

[quote name='puellapaschalis' date='25 October 2008 - 02:24 PM' timestamp='1224959078' post='1686016']

For what it's worth, I vaguely remember reading somewhere (New Advent?) that there is (or was) another difference between solemn and simple vows: the consequences if one is released from them (or if they're commuted - I'm not up on the terminology). My understanding was that - certainly before 1983 - someone having left solemn vows could not legally contract marriage, whilst someone who had previously taken simple vows could (all this assuming that the commuting took place according to proper Church procedure): a solemn vow constituted a [i]diriment impediment[/i] and a simple vow....something else.

[/quote]

Since the revision of Canon Law, there's really not a canonical difference between Solemn and Simple vows. It used to be "more difficult" to dispense from Solemn vows, but that is no longer the case.

Just thought I'd add my two cents.

[Indwelling Trinity]

[quote name='Lilllabettt' date='25 October 2008 - 08:59 PM' timestamp='1224982782' post='1686213']
Hi EWIE! Long time no see. Is everything okay with you? I notice that your most recent comments have a "push back" quality to them. Or at least, it seems that way to me. For example, in this thread, saying Sister is "all over" the internet. Sorry if I'm seeing anger/frustration that isn't really there.

On the subject of this thread ... when I was in formation, we were taught that there is no distinction in canon law anymore, between simple perpetual and solemn vows.

I believe a distinction is still praticed in some communities that do take solemn vows ... the difference they emphasize is in the depth or quality of poverty declared ... I also remember reading somewhere that there was a difference in dispensations ... a bishop can dispense from simple vows, but the Pope's approval is required to dispense solemn vows. I'm not sure if there's any meat to this, or if I dreamed it during study time!
[/quote]

you have it pretty much correct Canon law of 1983 changed it but still allows those who have in the past had solemn vows to retain that title and understanding of the pre 1983 code.

Nuns cannot own property and must dispense of all prior to final vows where as in simple vows one only has to cede use of them. Marraige in solemn vows were illegal but contracting marriage in simple vows was legal but illicit. leaving the cloister undersolemn vows without proper permission entailed excommunication. The keys to the cloister were held only by the prioress and the clavaries appointed however true emergency like the convents on fire... LOL you could leave rather than become a crispy.

Solemn vows could only be dispensed by the Holy see and was rarely granted where as simple vows could be dispensed by the local ordinary. Failure in obedience i believe entailed mortal sin for solemn vows if given by precept of the superior with two witnesses present, where as I think it entailed it entailed venial sin depending on the matter in simple vows. Gee my canon law is getting rusty.. just basically everything was more pumped up and stricter in solemn vows to use laymans terms.

I remember as a young Carmelite my prioress telling me that if i left the cloiseter to step into the public part of the church that would incur excommunication if no prior consent had been given. Sure scared me! LOL !

also when i was in cloister we were not allowed to be seen by others. we had a double grille covered by a black curtain if the cutain was open we had to wear our great veils covering our face. The only exception was with our parents. In any event one never went to the grille alone but a companion always was appointed to listen in on the conversation so that if anything unseemly was said the sister would be given a warning and the prioress would be duly informed of the transgression.

It was pretty strict back in those days to be sure.... But really I found it no burden and was happy for the silence of the cloister.

[Saint Therese]

Nuns usually have cooler outfits.