Speaking as a religious (one who does wear a habit) I don’t know how aware the lay faithful are of how uncomfortable we who wear habits become when this conversation comes up. We (religious) do not see this as a us vs them or habit vs non habits. We see this is a question that is about charisms, history and choice. It makes us very uncomfortable when it is discussed as A vs B, because it sounds as if there are two camps of religious who are in opposition to each other. This is not the case at all. We actually work well together. We get along well and we do wonderful things together. Please don’t do this to us. Don’t classify us into those who look like religious and those who don’t. We don’t like it. You’re not doing us favors. You’re creating a juxtaposition in an area where we religious have none. Those of us who wear a habit do not care if another religious does not do so. We care about his/her charism.
The habit is no guarrantee that someone is faithful to the charism of the community, obedient to the founder, faithful to the Gospel, charitable in all things, prayerful and penitential. We had habits for centuries. We had sisters in habits breaking kids’ arms in schools, religious molesting children, priests living in sin with men, women or both, dirty politics inside monasteries and so on. Holiness is a journey that involves the will of man and the grace of God.
When we look at the question of habits we ask ourselves what was the wish of the founder? I don’t mean to be rude, but we never ask what does the laity want or what is good for the laity when speaking about a habit. The response to religious life is very much like the response to marriage. You fall in love with a charism just as a man falls in love with a woman. The habit may or may not be part of that charism.
It may have been the intent of the founder to have a habit. It may have been the intent of the founder not to have a habit. In many cases, founders did not think it was necessary. Sometimes the habit crept in because it was the thing to do. Other religious were doing it. Those religious have to examine themselves and ask if they should or should not wear a habit. They certainly should not wear it, if their founder did not want it. Just because someone else says that it makes them feel good is not a good enough reason. The founder is the patriarch or matriarch of the community. He or she is the person with the vision and to whom the Holy Spirit revealed the charism.
Even the most sinful founders were gifted by the Holy Spirit with a vision. That vision is what should govern the community. If there is a habit in that vision, it must be followed. It there is not, then one has some flexibility. If there was adamant opposition to the habit, from the founder, then there should be no habit.
A perfect example is Mother Teresa. Her vision was to found a society in which the women were Indian. She made it clear from the beginning that this was what Jesus had told her and that her sisters, whethere they came from India or America, were to be Indian in their form of dress and in their customs. Therefore, they wear a sari and bow. The European model of the habit is taboo among them. They would not trade the sari for a shorter veil, blouse and skirt, because that’s not Indian. People don’t know that the Missionaries of Charity also have men religious. You don’t know it because Christ told Mother Teresa that he did not want them to be noticed. There rule prohibits the use of a habit by male Missionaries of Charity. They call themselves brothers, but they follow the Franciscan model. Some brothers are ordained. However, it is their mission to go through the world doing good for the poorest of the poor without being noticed. They wear no habit and no Roman collars. It would be wrong for the faithful to wish that they did so, just so that they could recognize them. Would anyone here want a Missionary of Charity to act contrary to the vision of Mother Teresa?
Some founders had a vision that included a habit and others did not. Our own founder, St. Francis, included a habit in his rule. However, he was much more liberal than St. Dominic. That’s why you see only one version of the Dominican habit and literally over 100 versions of the Franciscan habit. The only rule that Francis had is that it be a tunic with or without a hood and a chord. Franciscan men and women can decide what that tunic should look like. You have many variations. You always recognize the chord. St. Clare’s advice was even more flexible. She told her nuns to wear a habit that was modest, comfortable, appropriate for the climate and the culture where they found themselves. That was a radical way of thinking to include culture in the admonition.
Every community has its founder, its charism and its reasons. For some, the founders did not want them to be so visible. Another group that I just recalled that were told by their founder not to distinguish themselves in public are the Brothers of Mary. They wear whatever is worn by secular educators. Their founder wanted the to be excellent Christian teachers, not visible religious.
When I meet a religious from a religious family that I don’t know, I don’t ask myself why they don’t do things the way that the Franciscan family does them. Take it easy on religious that do not wear a habit and be mindful that it’s not about what the faithful want or like. It’s about the charism that the Holy Spirit gave to the founder for the good of the religious and the world.
Pray for and support religious who are trying to be faithful to their charism, whether the charism includes a habit or not. If you’re not sure of the charism, get curious. Read about it.
I don’t know about every founder and every charism. I just look it up or I ask them.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
… when I saw the pic I hoped that it was a cold day in winter for the novices…it can be a demanding life and an extremely happy one if you are called to the life, and nothing quite like just listening quietly to the happy joyous gentle ripple of conversation and laughter of nuns at recreation. It used to remind me of the tinkling of different kinds of bells…the website really is worth looking at.
. Psychology calls it “the herding instinct”. And individuality is supressed first by the self and then also by society and so Ann Raynd “Anthem” had a very valid point as her central theme. We suppress our individuality because we dont want to face the truth of matters that we really are alone in this universe, I am unique and a one off only as every single creature is…borne out by the fact that at final judgement we must stand absolutely alone before God becuase that is where we always are - before He who knows me and all as well as we know ourselves, in fact better than that.
I have decided to leave school at least until mid 2009 when I will review my decision. This gives me free time (apologies!