Can/do members of religious communities hold library cards?

  • Thread starter Thread starter QuizBowlNerd
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Q

QuizBowlNerd

Guest
And if they can hold them, how does it work? Are there one or more communal cards? Could an individual have one in their own name, or would that violate the vow of poverty? I realize this is something that probably varies from community to community, but I would be interested in any anecdotal information you might have to offer.
 
I suppose it could vary by community, but I know members of active orders who have library cards. Since they’re borrowing books rather than purchasing them, poverty isn’t an issue.
 
I have no anecdotal evidence, but a few thoughts:

The library card itself is not a thing of value, and the physical card is probably not even necessary to use the library. The library card holder does not own the books or other resources. Therefore it probably does not conflict with the vows of poverty.

The library card represents a privilege, but not of the sort that elevates a person above others. Therefore library privileges probably do not conflict with humility.

The religious community may have its own library or collection, which is no different in principle from the public library or university library.
 
Last edited:
I doubt the library would allow a communal card; ours here wouldn’t. There’s no reason a library card would be problematic for religious unless it was something specific to a certain order (or more likely, the individual by determination of the superior). You’re overthinking the poverty vow here. Even in a vow of poverty, individuals are permitted their own certain things (that vary by order).
 
What exactly would the problem be with a member of an order holding a library card?

If the concern is they’re holding it in their own name, as someone else said, a library card is not property ownership. It’s just an indication that so-and-so meets the criteria to have a card (usually that they have an address in the local area).

Members of religious orders also can and do hold drivers’ licenses, passports, other types of licenses like medical license or bar license, social security cards, etc in their own names.

So I’m not sure why you think a library card is an issue.
 
Last edited:
Of course they do–and this does not just include active congregations. I know many contemplative sisters with library cards. Some use them to check out ebooks, some films, etc. Different monasteries have differing understandings of enclosure. For example, one Carmelite community I know has a rotation of sisters who do grocery shopping and other essential errands, and they go by the public library at the same time.

A library card is also a way of maintaining (not challenging) the vow of poverty.

In New York state, too, any resident of the state can use the NY Public Library (NY City). It is a fantastic resource, and during the pandemic it’s been fantastic to have access to its large collection of ebooks–much larger than in many smaller library systems in the state. Why shouldn’t religious have access to such resources? They are, after all, citizens.
 
Last edited:
This raises an interesting question. Sister Margaret Mary was born as Sally Jones; her name changed when she took her vows — although not legally. So her driver’s license, etc. will say Sally Jones. Her library card wouldn’t have to be so restricted, so it would be interesting to see how this is handled in various places.

I know that some active congregations are reverting back to their birth names so there’s no hassle with Medicare and Social Security.
 
People of religious communities do study and need to access the library for their studies.
 
Why would this violate a vow of poverty??? I don’t get the question here?
 
QuizBowlNerd said:
And if they can hold them, how does it work? Are there one or more communal cards? Could an individual have one in their own name, or would that violate the vow of poverty? I realize this is something that probably varies from community to community, but I would be interested in any anecdotal information you might have to offer.
Click to expand...
There would be no breaking of the vow of poverty here.

The only question would whether the order is cloistered or not.

If the monks or nuns are not allowed to leave their Monastery then getting a library card is pretty useless unless the library will mail the books
 
Many library cards allow you to checkout/access digital material. So cloistered religious could access materials even without going to a library, so long as the community permits computers or some other types of digital readers.
 
Last edited:
I knew a Dominican Friar once who struggled to get a library card because the library couldn’t confirm his address was permanent. His limited English didn’t help either - he kept telling them that his address was “the convent, where the priests live” (iirc this is technically correct but the nuances were sadly lost on the library staff). Eventually he had to get another member of the community to come and vouch for him.
Cor_ad_Cor said:
This raises an interesting question. Sister Margaret Mary was born as Sally Jones; her name changed when she took her vows — although not legally .
Click to expand...
Some might change their names legally while others won’t. In practice, it’s not really a problem - in most places you can call yourself anything you want (as many celebrities and artists do) but it’s your legal name that’s recorded on your identity documents.
 
InThePew said:
Some might change their names legally while others won’t. In practice, it’s not really a problem - in most places you can call yourself anything you want (as many celebrities and artists do) but it’s your legal name that’s recorded on your identity documents.
Click to expand...
Yes, of course. I was just relaying some information (poorly articulated) that had been given to me by a congregation of sisters going through the very issue of having no identification other than from their congregation, which used only their vowed religious names; this was mostly in the ‘70s, and they didn’t even have driver’s licenses, so the government hassled them a bit.
 
The type of thing you mention in the 70s is one reason why a lot of congregations now encourage their members to keep their own names. With the advent of Real ID in USA and everybody having to present a birth certificate and a social security card to the MVA for a driver’s license or a non-driver identity card (not sure if they had those in the 70s), I’m sure that’s even more of an issue.
 
Theologically, the principal reason lots of religious retain their own names is that it acknowledges both the significance and the primacy of the sacrament of baptism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top