Habits vs. No Habits

[Monica4316]

I really support the idea of nuns wearing habits. I believe that this helps a person to be more ‘separate’ from things of the world and more focused on God and their vocation. Even if they belong to a non cloistered order. It helps to not focus on clothing or fashion…not be distracted by vanity… I think the Carmelite habits especially are very beautiful but there is nothing vain about them, the person’s attention is directed to God and to spiritual things, not to externals…

 

[daughterofmary]

All the 1990 Carmels are considered to be part of the Discalced Carmelite Order, as the Order acknowledges them (this can be seen from the OCD website) and speaks of them as OCD monasteries. They just answer to the Holy Father and not the Father General.

 

[JReducation]

I really support the idea of nuns wearing habits. I believe that this helps a person to be more ‘separate’ from things of the world and more focused on God and their vocation. Even if they belong to a non cloistered order. It helps to not focus on clothing or fashion…not be distracted by vanity… I think the Carmelite habits especially are very beautiful but there is nothing vain about them, the person’s attention is directed to God and to spiritual things, not to externals…

I believe that the Church the Sacred Congregation for Religious Life and Secular Institutes would agree with you that religious (male and female) should wear a habit, if that is the tradition of their community.

At the same time, having dealt with the Sacred Congregation for Religious Life and Secular Institutes will protect those religious whose religious communities were not meant to have a habit according to the wishes of the founder.

The laity has to be respectful of the intentions of the founders, not just of its own likes and dislikes. It is important to remember that religious life was not founded for the laity. It was founded for the religious.

One enters the religious life to be a religious, not to be a teacher, nurse, social worker, or priest. You can be any of those without being a religious. If you enter the religious life, it’s because the community and its founder have inspired you in some way. The point is that the laity can express its opinion on this subject, but must always defer to the founder of the community.

For example, The Sacred Congregation has made it clear to the Vincentian family that it will not demand they wear a habit, because Vincent de Paul did not want them to wear a habit. The habit was adopted later and also found to be impractical later.

They will not demand that Franciscans wear a habit. Francis did not write it into his rule It was adopted later. That’s why the styles and colours vary from one Franciscan community to another. In this case, the Order itself has opted for a habit. The reason they can do this is because Francis wrote in the rule that the community chapter has the authority to make such decisions. This was not the case in the statutes of St. Vincent.

On the other hand, there are communities such as the Carmelites (male and females) who have a habit in their rule. The Sacred Congregation would like to see them maintain it, even if it’s in a modified form.

The policy of the Sacred Congration for Religious Life and Secular Institutes is that religious garb should be simple, practical and becoming. I’ve always found it interesting that they added the word “becoming” into their description of a religious habit. Becoming was probably not one of the words in the minds of the founders.

Fraternally,

JR

 

[CarmeliteGirl25]

I believe that the Church the Sacred Congregation for Religious Life and Secular Institutes would agree with you that religious (male and female) should wear a habit, if that is the tradition of their community.

At the same time, having dealt with the Sacred Congregation for Religious Life and Secular Institutes will protect those religious whose religious communities were not meant to have a habit according to the wishes of the founder.

The laity has to be respectful of the intentions of the founders, not just of its own likes and dislikes. It is important to remember that religious life was not founded for the laity. It was founded for the religious.

One enters the religious life to be a religious, not to be a teacher, nurse, social worker, or priest. You can be any of those without being a religious. If you enter the religious life, it’s because the community and its founder have inspired you in some way. The point is that the laity can express its opinion on this subject, but must always defer to the founder of the community.

For example, The Sacred Congregation has made it clear to the Vincentian family that it will not demand they wear a habit, because Vincent de Paul did not want them to wear a habit. The habit was adopted later and also found to be impractical later.

They will not demand that Franciscans wear a habit. Francis did not write it into his rule It was adopted later. That’s why the styles and colours vary from one Franciscan community to another. In this case, the Order itself has opted for a habit. The reason they can do this is because Francis wrote in the rule that the community chapter has the authority to make such decisions. This was not the case in the statutes of St. Vincent.

On the other hand, there are communities such as the Carmelites (male and females) who have a habit in their rule. The Sacred Congregation would like to see them maintain it, even if it’s in a modified form.

The policy of the Sacred Congration for Religious Life and Secular Institutes is that religious garb should be simple, practical and becoming. I’ve always found it interesting that they added the word “becoming” into their description of a religious habit. Becoming was probably not one of the words in the minds of the founders.

Fraternally,

JR

I think we all understand that some religious orders were founded without a habit in mind. I’m not sure what I would do in that case, but those who have a habit in their original Rule should return to it. Case and point…

 

[Augustine]

On the other hand, there are communities such as the Carmelites (male and females) who have a habit in their rule. The Sacred Congregation would like to see them maintain it, even if it’s in a modified form.

Which hasn’t always happened, in some cases in any shape or form.

Not to mention that some nuns thought that miniskirts would qualify for a modified “habit”, even with the request that it should be becoming.

May All Saints pray for us that the Lord weed out scandal from the Church.

 

[JReducation]

Which hasn’t always happened, in some cases in any shape or form.

Not to mention that some nuns thought that miniskirts would qualify for a modified “habit”, even with the request that it should be becoming.

May All Saints pray for us that the Lord weed out scandal from the Church.

You may have just answered my question, why the word “becoming”? Maybe they wanted to avoid saying, “Stay away from the absurd.”

Fraternally,

JR

 

[JReducation]

I think we all understand that some religious orders were founded without a habit in mind. I’m **not sure what I would do in that case, **but those who have a habit in their original Rule should return to it. Case and point…

The bold is mine.

What’s aren’t you sure? If the charism of the community calls out to you and you have a strong identification with the founder, it seems very natural to follow along.

I’m remembering a case on the opposite side of the aisle. Many years ago a young woman came to me for spiritual direction. She felt very attracted the charism of the Servants of the Holy Spirit and to their founder. There was only one problem. This is a cloistered community who wears a pink habit. Sometimes they are called the Pink Nuns.

This young woman was just completely turned off by the pink full habit: veil, guimpe,coif, cape, the works. After seeing a picture of them, I have to admit that I thought it was a little off-putting too.

To make a long story short, I pointed out that her eyes lit up when she spoke of the community and their founder. I had nothing else to go on, because I knew nothing of this community. She joined them. Today, 20 years later, she is still there and very happy.

The point is, that attraction to a religious community or a secular institute is more about identification with the founder and the charism, than about the clothing. We can make great sacrifices when we’re in love.

holyspiritadorationsisters.org/

Fraternally,

JR

 

[Adoro_Te_Devote]

Sisters copied their habits from nuns, except the Daughters of Charity and the Sisters of Charity. Nuns’ habits were originally the dress of the working woman of their time. Later reformers canonized the habits to what we saw until the later 1970s.

Fraternally,

JR

JR,

I am picking this quote of yours randomly (and because I haven’t finished reading all the comments). You contnually speak of the Sisters of Charity, however, I wonder if you are aware of the Sisters of Charity of Our Lady Mother of the Church?

This is a community that has broken from the original Sisters of Charity, because those Sisters were leaving their roots. The foundress of this particular community went to Rome to seek permission to retain their traditions while the rest of the Order changed, and PART of that included the ongoing use of their habit.

They were not founded directly by St. Vincent de Paul, although he is one of their greatest Saints and an inspiration to their community and clearly, to their Founder.

I am posting this largely to inform you that there are other “Sisters of Charity” that have sprung from the original, and so that they are not slandered by the first part of their title. These Sisters DO wear habits, they are very holy, the teach and work with the poor. Their motherhouse is in Baltic, CT, most of their Apostolate is on the East Coast although they are found here in MN as well as a couple other states, I think.

If you want more info you can find it at: www.sistersofcharity.com

Just an FYI.

 

[CarmeliteGirl25]

The bold is mine.

What’s aren’t you sure? If the charism of the community calls out to you and you have a strong identification with the founder, it seems very natural to follow along.

I’m remembering a case on the opposite side of the aisle. Many years ago a young woman came to me for spiritual direction. She felt very attracted the charism of the Servants of the Holy Spirit and to their founder. There was only one problem. This is a cloistered community who wears a pink habit. Sometimes they are called the Pink Nuns.

This young woman was just completely turned off by the pink full habit: veil, guimpe,coif, cape, the works. After seeing a picture of them, I have to admit that I thought it was a little off-putting too.

To make a long story short, I pointed out that her eyes lit up when she spoke of the community and their founder. I had nothing else to go on, because I knew nothing of this community. She joined them. Today, 20 years later, she is still there and very happy.

The point is, that attraction to a religious community or a secular institute is more about identification with the founder and the charism, than about the clothing. We can make great sacrifices when we’re in love.

holyspiritadorationsisters.org/

Fraternally,

JR

Well, I do agree that clothing should not be playing a huge factor. I used to be attracted to the Servants of Our Lord and the Virgin of Mataera, but I hate their habit (especially the turquoise). In my opinion, if I was called there, it would be a sacrifice to wear, but I think that’s the point. I am very much in love with Jesus and He made sacrifices for me, so I think the sacrifice of wearing an ugly habit would be a small, but necessary one for Him. Glad she understood that, too.

 

[JReducation]

JR,

I am picking this quote of yours randomly (and because I haven’t finished reading all the comments). You contnually speak of the Sisters of Charity, however, I wonder if you are aware of the Sisters of Charity of Our Lady Mother of the Church?

This is a community that has broken from the original Sisters of Charity, because those Sisters were leaving their roots. The foundress of this particular community went to Rome to seek permission to retain their traditions while the rest of the Order changed, and PART of that included the ongoing use of their habit.

They were not founded directly by St. Vincent de Paul, although he is one of their greatest Saints and an inspiration to their community and clearly, to their Founder.

I am posting this largely to inform you that there are other “Sisters of Charity” that have sprung from the original, and so that they are not slandered by the first part of their title. These Sisters DO wear habits, they are very holy, the teach and work with the poor. Their motherhouse is in Baltic, CT, most of their Apostolate is on the East Coast although they are found here in MN as well as a couple other states, I think.

If you want more info you can find it at: www.sistersofcharity.com

Just an FYI.

Actually, I don’t think badly of the Sisters of Charity at all, any of them. The Sisters of Charity of Our Lady Mother of the Church are one of many reforms of the Sisters of Charity. St. Bernadette belonged to one of those reform communities, the Sisters of Charity of Nevers.

I referred to the Daughters of Charity and St. Elizabeth Ann Seton’s Sisters of Charity as an example of two communities that were founded without habits. That was not meant to cast a shadow on other communities of the Sisters of Charity who wear a habit.

The Daughters of Charity and Mother Seton’s Sisters of Charity have the unique characteristic of belonging to the Vincentian family. Whereas the other Sisters of Charity do not belong to the Vincentian family, even though they certainly live and apply Vincent’s spirit.

Not belonging to Vincent’s family, they are not bound by his constitutions. This is what allows them to wear a habit. Whereas those who belong to Vincent’s community do not have the habit in the constitution, because they are not religious sisters. Vincent never intended for his sisters to be religious. Therefore, they were not to live in convents, wear habits, or have chapels. Many of these things were acquired later for many good reasons. Today, the Church is telling the Vincentian family to return to their secular roots.

They are not the only order who has been told this. The Franciscans have been told to return to their lay roots. They are to ordain only enough priests to meet the needs of the bortherhood and are not to adopt more new parishes. As to their habit, they are to wear whatever the General Chapter says, as prescribed in the Rule of St. Francis.

The Jesuits have been advised to return to the spirit of St. Ignatius and to drop the habit. They are to dress as other secular priests dress, for such was the will of St. Ignatius.

The Carmelites, on the other hand, have been told to find a modest and practical version of the Carmelite habit as written in their rule.

The Poor Clares were told that they have a choice, as St. Clare did not speak about a habit or wear one herself. We have no idea what she wore, other than she dressed in the poor garb of the time and went barefoot with a tonsure.

That’s why I said that the directions and the charism of founder is indispensable and the laity needs to read that before we criticize or judge. Sometimes we’re too quick to pass judgment.

The Franciscan sisters form one of the largest religious families in the USA and they do not wear a habit, because they were born from the Secular Franciscan Order. Francis did not give the Secular Franciscans a habit, Pope Nicholas IV did and Pope Paul VI made it optional.

The Trappists still wear the traditional Cistercian habit, because St. Bernard wrote it into their rule. The Church expects them to keep it.

Fraternally,

JR

 

[barb_finnegan]

I just saw the picture of the Baltimore ‘carmelites’ (?) …

Reminds me of a video I have about the visit of St. Therese’s relics to their monastery-again . There were several interviews with the-then ‘prioress’ (?). No veil, much less any kind of habit. And when they came together to sing the "Salve Regina’, the community wore-not their habits and white mantles-but WHITE ALBS! THEY LOOKED LIKE ‘PRIESTESSES’ !

I have some ‘experience’ with ‘carmelites with no habits’. In 1995, a few months after receiving my Scapular in the OCDS, I made a week’s retreat at the Carmel (?) in Beacon, NY. I noticed that only one or two older Sisters wore a modified habit. The others, including the prioress, wore a ‘uniform’ consisting of a beige blouse, lightish-browm skirt, NO VEIL, and a medallion with images of St. Teresa and St. John of the Cross (NO SCAPULAR). They also did the Office in inclusive language, and I ended up having to ‘self-communicate’ myself at the one and only Mass I attended.

Needless to say, I slipped out of that place as quickly as I could…!

I gravitate towards those Sisters who have kept their habit, like the ‘traditional’ Carmelites and Mother Angelica’s Poor Clares!

 

[1234]

This debate will continue as long as there is one nun in habit and one nun without a habit.

I think that concentrating on the original documents and intentions of the founders in this regard is very important. Clearly, some were intended for habits and some were not.

It is almost always the laity, and usually the married laity, and those who never are going to enter religious life who have the strongest opinions on this subject.

Older sisters clearly remember the awful, elaborate, hot, and ugly habits they had to wear, which required a great deal of upkeep, to be done in addition to their already overcommited lives usually as teachers of large classes or nurses. These women also remember the undue deference they received and the mixture of awe and hostility from those they served.

The large old communities are indeed dying out, but they were too large anyway, reflecting a boom in religious life that couldn’t last. There have been cycles in religious life as there are in all things. Branches of large congregations may indeed die out, but there will always be houses representing the major orders–out of habit. They will be smaller and more focussed, practicing their original charisms of working with the poor; they have sold their huge Victorian convents, schools and hospitals and are the better for it. They are continuing to attract entrants and make professions, many older, highly educated women with grown children. Some do practice some so-called new age observances, which are usually completely misunderstood by the laity, who believe that the enneagram, Reiki and Yoga are somehow subversive. All of these groups are in full communion. The Baltimore Carmel is one of the oldest in the country and it continues to grow.

It is not true that there are a lot of habited communities that are growing rapidly. There are a few habited communities that are growing rapidly, notably the Nashville and Ann Arbor Dominicans, Srs. of Life, Srs. of the Renewal, and the Srs. of St. Francis of St George. The PCPA’s in Hanceville-AL–,Mother Angelica’s group-are slowing down. After these, there are a few growing, and all are small, which may possibly be a part of their appeal. What matters is the number of Final Professions, not the number who enter.

Many habited branches are also in serious trouble. There are a number of orthodox OCD’s with fewer than 10 in each monastery, sometimes closer to 5. There are very small habited branches in the US which were founded abroad, usually Poland, who don’t have any in formation.

The total number of sisters is decreasing rapidly, from 180,000 at their peak in about 1963 to under 60,000 now. No resurgence or founding of habited orders is going to stem this tide. No one knows now where the bottom is.

The Roman Catholic church is a large church which can hold many tents. I don’t think that harping over habits and observances serves those that harp or those who practice religious life any good whatsoever. It will all sort out in time, but it isn’t necessarily going to sort out in the ways that people think it will.

 

[BarbaraTherese]

I am getting feedback from a group on Facebook that is driving me crazy. It is based on the argument from a few non-habited sisters and I think they are being a little too pushy about the subject. Someone originally posted an article on non-habited orders amongst women religious. The problem does not lie in the article at all. But the sisters have stated some pretty upsetting things that I don’t like at all.

I am currently in discernment towards becoming a religious sister, but even if I wasn’t, I would consider the habit crucial for a variety of reasons. The most important being that it is an outward symbol of abandonment of the secular lifestyle for Christ. But I don’t mean that doesn’t mean there aren’t women religious in our society who don’t wear a habit and live a good Christian lifestyle; it simply means that if you are called, why can’t you abandon your dress?

Here are some quotes of the sisters with my thoughts:

"As the next two years went on I found that wearing a habit distanced me from people."
–This could be true for people who don’t understand it. The sister then decided she didn’t want to wear a habit anymore because of this reason. What I gather from this statement is that her idea of sacrifice is: only do what people will approve of. That may not be true, but how else am I supposed to think when I hear this? Didn’t Christ say that people would persecute His followers, but that they persecuted Him first? Isn’t it holy and commendable to continue with something that may separate you from humanity, than give it up simply because other people don’t understand? Some people will never understand, but Christ, I believe looks at our acceptance of humility as a testament to our faith.

Many told me outright: "You’re so much easier to talk to; I felt intimidated by that habit."
–Nobody can be intimidated by clothing. Clothing is inanimate. Perhaps they felt intimidated by the character within the habit? Many progressive sisters say, “A habit doesn’t make the sister.” But maybe some of those who wear it consider themselves above others in society. If this is the case, they should take a good look at themselves and see if their ego is inflated?

"To others it was a sign of entitlement… because I wore it, I deserved to be the first in line, to get out of paying a traffic ticket, and to have my opinion weigh a lot more than anyone else’s."
–How can just wearing a piece of clothing say this? I would definitely think this sister’s view of the habit is warped.

"I wanted to be a real sister to people, not just a Sister with privileges and power. (Notice the capital “S” and lower case “s”. )"
–The only time I have ever seen this distinction is between a name and a reference. Sisters in habits are no different than sisters in secular dress, in terms of holiness or privilege, and certainly not power. Take the Poor Clares for example. They live a hidden lifestyle full of poverty and simplicity. They do not seek power or greater privilege. They take example from St. Francis (and this sister who said the quoted statement is Franciscan, so she should understand this), who desired to be forgotten. He wore a habit, but he wanted to wear it simply to show that he had no clothing; that he had abandoned it for Christ’s ministry. I certainly think that’s commendable.

"Second hand clothing is what the poor wear today; not medieval clothing."
–The current habit is not medieval!

"So, naturally, when I hear younger folks today who feel adamant about wearing the habit, my first thought comes from my own experience and it’s "My gosh, are they seeking just to be recognized and thanked?"
–No one in the argument for habits said that they were seeking acknowledgment from anyone other than Christ. Some of her statements really make me angry because like this one they are stating that those who want to wear the habit are just doing it to be noticed. I think it is quite the contrary. I want to live a hidden life amongst either the Carmelites or the Poor Clares. No one will see me in my habit except the sisters and visitors. I will not be on the streets. But I still want to wear one simply because I want to surrender EVERYTHING to Christ, including my secular dress!

I don’t mean to imply that sisters without the habit are no less holy than ones who wear it, but I have discovered that most women without them embrace more New Age ideals. Take this picture for instance:
http://ccacarmels.org/images/Agnesahn.jpg
This sister is performing a liturgical dance that I have noticed that only non-habited sisters embrace. “What order does this sister belong to?” is what you are probably asking yourself. She is a Discalced Carmelite nun from Baltimore Carmel. None of the nuns at Baltimore wear habits.

Please give your feedback. I want to hear better arguments. My view will not change about wearing habits, but it could help others. Thank you, and God bless!

There appears to be a couple of sisters in habit in the picture, CG…unless they are only visitors and not Baltimore Carmelites. Nor can one picture said to be making a statement about all religious. I know of an Order of Carmelites here in Australia who are a mixture of habited and non habited sisters - choice is optional. Certainly the habit is down low on my list of importance were I considering a vocation, while I would prefer the habit. I have been quite startled at the level of emotionalism and almost vehement opposition to non habited nuns as expressed here on CAF at times…clearly placing the habit very high indeed in importance and giving it, to my mind, a meaning that it does not have in the sense of that if a sister is not in habit she does not live her religious life with that particular meaning intrinsic.

Blessings - Barb

 

[BarbaraTherese]

After these, there are a few growing, and all are small, which may possibly be a part of their appeal. What matters is the number of Final Professions, not the number who enter.

This can be very true. There is a strictly enclosed Order of nuns (not Carmelite) here in Australia who always have pictures with many young novices…actual final professions is another story entirely. I think many may have romantic notions about the habit…if they actually wore one day in and day out and especially in hot weather they would realize how restrictive and uncomfortable they can be under many circumstances. A year into the noviciate and the wearing of the full habit usually defines those who are prepared to accept the penance the full habit can be daily…by then most often all romantic notions re the habit have to be abandoned.

The Roman Catholic church is a large church which can hold many tents. I don’t think that harping over habits and observances serves those that harp or those who practice religious life any good whatsoever. It will all sort out in time, but it isn’t necessarily going to sort out in the ways that people think it will.

Sound common sense and as St. Albert said, “common sense is the guide of all the virtues” (Ancient Rule of Carmel). Our God is the God of the Surprise and we may indeed if we could see into the future be very surprised indeed at the face of The Church in say 50 to 100 years time. We are changing and rapidly for the Catholic Church. Anyone who claims they know at this point what The Church should be changing into is delusional - and I dont mean doctrinally…rather in the day to day operation. Our God of The Surprise.
I am under private vows and have been for some 25years and would love to wear a habit in the interests of poverty and not having to worry about what to wear…and so I have a habit and wear one, but it looks nothing like a traditional nuns habit so as not to offend the silly in our midst. I do not wear a veil, although mine has been blessed and is put away and treasured. My uniform or standard wear (‘habit’) is denim , cheap, easily laundered and long lasting - comes in light and heavy weights. It is also entirely functional for any duty whatsoever in house and garden. You know what penance is I think when you are outside on a warm windless summer’s day in Australia in full habit doing the weeding in the vege garden…and you can’t come inside after and have a nice refreshing shower. In fact in my convent days pre V2, we could only bath every three days. That is penance!

Barb

.

 

[CarmeliteGirl25]

There appears to be a couple of sisters in habit in the picture, CG…unless they are only visitors and not Baltimore Carmelites. Nor can one picture said to be making a statement about all religious. I know of an Order of Carmelites here in Australia who are a mixture of habited and non habited sisters - choice is optional. Certainly the habit is down low on my list of importance were I considering a vocation, while I would prefer the habit. I have been quite startled at the level of emotionalism and almost vehement opposition to non habited nuns as expressed here on CAF at times…clearly placing the habit very high indeed in importance and giving it, to my mind, a meaning that it does not have in the sense of that if a sister is not in habit she does not live her religious life with that particular meaning intrinsic.

Blessings - Barb

As I said on my original post, I am not against all non-habited sisters at all. And the sisters in the picture (I think I see maybe one or two) are not part of the Baltimore Carmelites. This was taking place at a meeting of religious sisters who are a part of Mary, Queen of Carmel Association.

I do want to make one thing clear to everyone here:

I am, in no way, trying to say that the habit is the most important thing in religious life. I believe that the most important thing is the relationship with Christ, and how we live His word.

That being said, please don’t think that I, in any way, trying to discourage others from joining non-habited orders. If the Holy Spirit is leading you to a non-habited order, GO! Just proceed with caution, like all orders. God bless!

 

[Leeta]

Read Ungodly Rage by Donna Steichen and you will understand how the non-habited orders came to be.

They are disobedient to Holy Mother Church. Pope John Paull II asked that every religious order have habits. He did not say they must be like the older versions or what specifically, just that they have a habit. The habit is an outward sign of the Kingdom of God already present in this world. They are living that life now already, espoused to Christ.

 

[Leeta]

My sister-in-law is a real live Sister in a habit no less. Once the Sisters were at a conference of women religious. As they were discussing something at a meeting somehow there were a couple of women who kept coming to the small groups sessions or what ever. Mother asked them why they were there since this was for religious sisters. The woman pointed to a rather small pin on her jacket and said why she was a sister too, hadn’t they noticed her distinctive pin?

So as an inside joke they refered to these non-habited sisters as sisters-of-the-distinctive-pin!

How is anyone going to recognise non-habited nuns as religious?

 

[BarbaraTherese]

Thank you, CG, for your comments. I thought possibly that the habited nuns in the picture may be visiting nuns.

This post by Fr. Corey I found of interest also.

something I found on the subject.
domestic-church.com/CONTENT.DCC/19980701/ARTICLES/NUNS.HTM

The above document which quotes a 1965 Papal Document does mention the religious habit (see Item 17) and in this long document item 17 is the only place where the religious habit is mentioned and is often quoted out of context of the whole document to support the wearing of a religious habit and under the terms of pre V2 of wearing it at all times and never removing it unless retiring. Item 17 mentions nothing about wearing the habit at all times. Not only this Item 17 needs to be put into the context of the whole document and weighed up accordingly.

Quoting Item 17:

17. The religious habit, an outward mark of consecration to God, should be simple and modest, poor and at the same becoming. In addition it must meet the requirements of health and be suited to the circumstances of time and place and to the needs of the ministry involved. The habits of both men and women religious which do not conform to these norms must be changed. (Editor’s note: notice here that the idea of abandoning the habit altogether is not even considered)

…there is no statement in Item 17 that the religious habit is mandatory to religious life. Nor is there any mention of the habit in Canon Law to my knowledge. In fact, and again to my knowledge, there is no statement anywhere from The Church that the religious habit, or a religious habit, is mandatory to religious life. True it is a mark of consecration…but no reason why religious cannot decide to adopt another public mark of their public consecration - such as a cross pin worn on the shoulder, or pendant on chain etc.

The Servants of The Sacred Cross (ecumenical order open to Catholic women) wears the full habit with modified veil, but as the result of sound common sense have adopted a very simple work habit.

In addition it must meet the requirements of health and be suited to the circumstances of time and place and to the needs of the ministry involved

The above from Item 17 is to be considered in the context of the wearing of the religious habit.

Some Orders have a religious habit (modified) and also a secular wardrobe and the habit is only mandatory in the Order at certain times…out in the garden doing gardening for example, one can wear jeans and TShirt if one wishes. An optional work habit I think would be another good idea for those perhaps wishing to wear secular clothing only in extreme necessity shoud one crop up.

The term “sisters of the distinctive pin” can either be good natured teasing amongst religious or lay persons, or meant as a quite nasty sort of comment by either or both. Tone of voice and person speaking also speaks to the content of anything stated…this is where a computer can fall down in communicating. Certainly I have a secular wardrobe (quite limited one) as sometimes I may be invited to dinner in a hotel and find secular clothing is condusive to good manners and courtesty to those who have invited me. Or I may be asked out to a picnic, in which case I wear jeans and a casual top. But I never remove my silver and black cross on a leather thong no matter what I am wearing…I remove it to sleep. I wear no other jewellery at any time except a commitment band on my third finger left hand.

Barb

 

[JReducation]

I just saw the picture of the Baltimore ‘carmelites’ (?) …

Reminds me of a video I have about the visit of St. Therese’s relics to their monastery-again . There were several interviews with the-then ‘prioress’ (?). No veil, much less any kind of habit. And when they came together to sing the "Salve Regina’, the community wore-not their habits and white mantles-but WHITE ALBS! THEY LOOKED LIKE ‘PRIESTESSES’ !

I have some ‘experience’ with ‘carmelites with no habits’. In 1995, a few months after receiving my Scapular in the OCDS, I made a week’s retreat at the Carmel (?) in Beacon, NY. I noticed that only one or two older Sisters wore a modified habit. The others, including the prioress, wore a ‘uniform’ consisting of a beige blouse, lightish-browm skirt, NO VEIL, and a medallion with images of St. Teresa and St. John of the Cross (NO SCAPULAR). They also did the Office in inclusive language, and I ended up having to ‘self-communicate’ myself at the one and only Mass I attended.

Needless to say, I slipped out of that place as quickly as I could…!

I gravitate towards those Sisters who have kept their habit, like the ‘traditional’ Carmelites and Mother Angelica’s Poor Clares!

This is not meant to be disrespectful to the Poor Clares of Perpetual Adoration at Mother Angelica’s monastery. Just an FYI for anyone who wants to know.

The habit worn by the Poor Clares of Perpetual Adoration at Mother’s monastery is not the traditional Poor Clare habit. This particular design was created in the mid 1990s. The design is not Franciscan. It is Dominican. The reason they were allowed this design is because the Poor Clares of Perpetual Adoration are not the same Poor Clares founded by St. Francis and St. Clare. This community was founded in France after the French Revolution. They follow a different constitution and recently joined the Franciscan family. By recently I mean during the 20th century.

The traditiional Poor Clare habit is much simpler than this. It has only a black veil, no scapular, no pendant or cross on the chest, only a cord at the waist and sandals without stockings. The coif is is made of cotton without starch. The tunic is down to the ankles, per the Rule of St. Clare.

This is traditional Poor Clare habit. poor-clares.org/

Fraternally,

JR

 

[CarmeliteGirl25]

This is not meant to be disrespectful to the Poor Clares of Perpetual Adoration at Mother Angelica’s monastery. Just an FYI for anyone who wants to know.

The habit worn by the Poor Clares of Perpetual Adoration at Mother’s monastery is not the traditional Poor Clare habit. This particular design was created in the mid 1990s. The design is not Franciscan. It is Dominican. The reason they were allowed this design is because the Poor Clares of Perpetual Adoration are not the same Poor Clares founded by St. Francis and St. Clare. This community was founded in France after the French Revolution. They follow a different constitution and recently joined the Franciscan family. By recently I mean during the 20th century.

The traditiional Poor Clare habit is much simpler than this. It has only a black veil, no scapular, no pendant or cross on the chest, only a cord at the waist and sandals without stockings. The coif is is made of cotton without starch. The tunic is down to the ankles, per the Rule of St. Clare.

This is traditional Poor Clare habit. poor-clares.org/

Fraternally,

JR

No wonder I thought it looks odder than the other Poor Clares. I think I prefer the austere habit of the Poor Clare nuns like Roswell and Belleville. I like the PCPA’s, don’t get me wrong, but I think if I were to join the Poor Clares (and I was considering it for a while), it would be one of the more traditional orders.