A
- Status
A
ATeutonicKnight
Guest
I’m not saying it’s bad to change things which need it. Never once did I state that.
A
ATeutonicKnight
Guest
It’s a matter of words. Tradition means tradition whether you put an A in front of it or not. A tradition is still involved in tradition. I keep things simple. I care not whether an A was put in front of it or not, it is still means tradition.It is not tradition. It is A tradition. There is a difference. and it is subject to change at the discretion of those bound to it according to the mind of their founder.
For example, in the Franciscan family, we can drop the habit by simple vote, even though it is a tradition to have one. We’re not bound to keep it. It’s A tradition, not tradition.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
This part about the Franciscans I already know. I’m not saying traditions are the most important thing in the world. But tradition is tradition, and it should be treated with respect, not just something that can be thrown to the side like it doesn’t matter, because it does.
I don’t even know why we’re still arguing. I have said time and time again that not wearing Habits is fine, even to the point of almost hating Habits because we got to talking about it so much. It doesn’t matter. There are much more important things to worry about, namely, my noticeable hair-loss from pulling out so much of it while arguing about this stupid topic. I get it. Let’s move on with our lives. I’d rather not be known as the one who yelled at Brother Jay and Brother… David I believe?
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
You need to actually read what is being said.
As Br JR points out, the way religious dress is not tradition, its A tradition.
If a religious institute does not wear a habit and it says this in its constitutions/statutes then the Pope has approved that.
I could do a cut and paste job as you tried to do with what I have said to show that what you have said is different than what you state here but I think I will leave it and allow people to read the whole thread if they wish to see what you have been saying.
I am stating to believe that Br Mike (Ocarm) was correct in his assessment when he stated that invincible ignorance in involved here.
I will leave this to Br JR as he seems to have the best explanations (even though you are not reading them or maybe you are but you are unable to understand them) and the patience to deal with it here.
A
ATeutonicKnight
Guest
Again, I know that it is okay to not wear a Habit. Have I said it isn’t in the past ten messages?
I will no longer speak about the subject. My patience has been tested, mainly because I keep repeating my words over, and over, and over again. I have said it is fine not to wear a Habit. I have explained why I was skeptical about it at first. And I have explained why I love the Habit so much. Arguing about wording and the difference between tradition and a tradition is ridiculous and a waste of all of our time. If I have to explain again that I understand it’s okay not to wear one again I’m throwing my laptop through the window.
M
MontChevalier
Guest
They are doing the program. You and I can’t change their program. If you read their constitutions, you will find that those sisters religious who do not wear a habit are not bound to wear one. The constitutions are approved by the Holy See. Once a constitution is approved by the Holy See, that is “the program”. There is no other.
When the Holy See approves a constitution without a habit it’s usually for one of three reasons:
*]The founder never intended the community to have one. He or she actually wanted the religious to remain anonymous. He or she did NOT want them to be seen by others. This is very legitimate. It’s a form of enclosure. Just as one founder builds a very tall monastic wall around his religious so as to hide them away from society, another blends them into the crowd. There is an old saying that many founders found to be very true. If you want to hide something, put it in plain sight. One of those founders was Vincent de Paul. He explicitly said in his statutes that the streets of Paris were to be the cloister and modesty was to be their veil. Today, the Daughters of Charity have returned to the original statutes of St. Vincent. They blend in with the secular world as was his desire and intention. The Church recognizes and approves this. This is their program, to use your language.
*]Another reason fro approving a constitution without a habit may be the character of the religious community. Many religious communities of men were founded as communities of Clerks Regular. These are priests who make vows and are part of a community for the purpose of a particular ministry, not for the purpose of living a fraternal or common life. The first of these communities was the Society of Jesus. St. Ignatius wanted his men to be priests, to make vows, but he did not want them to live as religious live. They were to live like secular clergy. They were not to have a distinctive garb. They were not to pray together, eat together, play together or even work together. These things are optional to the Society of Jesus. Unlike Carmelites or Franciscans that have a heavy emphasis on community life, the Clerks Regular, which are many, do not have that emphasis. A habit says something about them that is not true. It says that they are a brotherhood. They are not a brotherhood. They are as much brothers to each other as you and I are. But you and I are not a brotherhood. These communities are also exempt from a habit. They may wear whatever is normal or customary for clerics in their region, as Canon Law clearly states.
*]Finally, the third reason that some communities are given permission not to have a habit, even when they had one before Vatican II, is because their habit is not practical for the work that they do or for the situations in which they live. If the community is organized around a particular apostolate, the Church requires that its mode of dress be consistent with that apostolate.
For example, there is a congregation of sisters called The Medical Mission Sisters. Originally, they wore a habit similar to the old Maryknoll habit. However, that habit is no longer practical in the modern hospital setting, especially given the fact that we are much more conscious of diseases transmitted by body fluids, of such things a nuclear radiation used in certain treatments and with certain forms of technology, and certain requirements of the health departments in different regions of the world.
In the past, these sisters wore the same habit every day. They had two habits, one for daily use and one for special days. This is not sanitary or safe. Since they are doctors, nurses medical technicians and other medical professionals, these sisters wear what is safe and practical for a hospital and what they can discard at the end of a shift or at the end of a medical procedure, something that they could not do in the past. In a case such as theirs, the Holy See realizes that their old custom was not practical or healthy.
Like this, there are other communities that were given permission not to wear their former habits, because it ceased to be practical. This is the same reason that a friar may put aside his tunic, scapular and mantle and put on a Roman collar. The habit is his proper form of dress, not the Roma collar. The Roman collar does not identify him as a friar. If Brother David, Brother O’Carm and I walked down the street of your city in Roman collars, would you know which two are Carmelites and which one is Franciscan? Would you know which one is a priest and which one is not? Or is that you just want to see us in a uniform and you really don’t care whether we’re Carmelite or Franciscan? If that’s the case, then what you really want is not a habit that identifies us, but universal uniform and you don’t really care about our specific vocations and charisms.
My friend, have you ever met a nun? Are you sure? Most Catholics live and die without ever meeting a nun.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
Mmmm…now I’m doubting myself. Well, the deacon told me she was a Nun, and I think everyone at the Church I go to believes she’s a Nun, I think. And this paper I got from that Church says she’s a member of the staff at the Church, although it only says she’s a secretary…Sooooo I have no clue.
But the Deacon told me she’s a Nun, I don’t really see a reason for him to lie about that. What would he gain? It just doesn’t make sense to me…
So what IS a Nun?
This quote from Wikipedia seems about right, but what exactly does a Nun a DO?
-MontChevalier
A
ATeutonicKnight
Guest
Wake up, pray, work, pray, eat, pray some more, go back to work, pray, sleep, and then repeat.Mmmm…now I’m doubting myself. Well, the deacon told me she was a Nun, and I think everyone at the Church I go to believes she’s a Nun, I think. And this paper I got from that Church says she’s a member of the staff at the Church, although it only says she’s a secretary…Sooooo I have no clue.
So what IS a Nun?
This quote from Wikipedia seems about right, but what exactly does a Nun a DO?
-MontChevalier
S
Sarahforgiven
Guest
I see what you are saying, but why then is Mother Theresa always in her “habit” the white & blue.Did anyone read what St. Eugene said to his Oblates, Bl. Mother Teresa said to her brothers and priests, or Bl. William Joseph Chaminade said to his brothers? They all said, “No habits.” These men were not given a choice. No habits means not cassocks, not Roman collars, not external identifiers, not even a crucifix.
Why do you folks want to take on these founders and impose on their sons what their founders banned?
I don’t get it.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
I think people are just hungry for signs of God & faith…
J
JReducation
Guest
I was trying to get your attention and I succeeded.Mmmm…now I’m doubting myself. Well, the deacon told me she was a Nun, and I think everyone at the Church I go to believes she’s a Nun, I think. And this paper I got from that Church says she’s a member of the staff at the Church, although it only says she’s a secretary…Sooooo I have no clue.
So what IS a Nun?
This quote from Wikipedia seems about right, but what exactly does a Nun a DO?
-MontChevalier
The problem is that even deacons don’t know the difference between a nun and a sister. In fact, most diocesan priests don’t know the difference. Remember, these men are not religious. They are secular, just like you. They are not formed in the theology and laws of the religious life. They call any woman in vows “a nun”.
Nuns and monnks live an enclosed life of silence, solitude, prayer and community. The highlight of their life is the LOTH, which is the crown around the mass.
What do they do the rest of the day?
Very little. They are usually quite wealthy. Nuns and monks do not have private or personal property, but they have communal property, be it land, factories on their grounds, monastery schools or monastery colleges. These provide enough income for them to live.
They usually engage in some form of work three or four hours a day and that’s it. This can be anything from making vestments to making videos for EWTN. The rest of their day, when they’re not in chapel for adoration or the LOTH, they play tennis, golf, walk, write, read, do private prayer, engage in hobbies.
The focus of their life is Christ. They are not very interested in what happens out here. That’s not to say that they don’t care about us. Actually, they give up their entire life for their salvation and that of the world.
However, they are not interested in knowing every detail about the world outside of the monastery. For example, when the sexual abuse scandal broke, most of them thought it was a horrible thing. They prayed over it and talked about it for 20 minutes and moved on.
When people talk and worry about abuses in the liturgy, they just look at each other and say, “It’s not our problem.” Even this discussion about habits, to them it’s a joke. Some cloistered communities of men or women wear them and some don’t. Some wear then part of the time. This has nothing to do with them or their Church. Their Church is the Church of heaven.
To us, this sounds very strange to us. But they have been called to the highest form of religious life. They have been called to do two things.
a. To die a slow death on a cross, by submitting themselves to total and unquestioning obedience of the abbot or abbess.
b. To live like the angels and saints, in constant praise of God
Most monks and nuns never receive visitors and they never leave their houses. There are some who do: Benedictines, Visitandines and Poor Clares. Even these folks, leave their houses to do very specific tasks and then return.
Don’t misunderstand, nuns thoroughly enjoy themselves when they do go outside of the monastery. I remember Mother Angelica enjoying a good meal at a restaurant and enjoying sight-seeing when she was going around trying to raise funds for EWTN. I other words, they don’t hate the world or consider the world to be corrupt and sinful. Just the opposite. They love the world and they enjoy their encounters with the world, because they don’t pay attention to the negatives.
As you can see, the don’t engage in apostolic work. Their apostolate is to become saints.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
A
ATeutonicKnight
Guest
It makes me laugh that you refer listening and being obedient to one’s superior as dying slowly on the cross.I was trying to get your attention and I succeeded.
The problem is that even deacons don’t know the difference between a nun and a sister. In fact, most diocesan priests don’t know the difference. Remember, these men are not religious. They are secular, just like you. They are not formed in the theology and laws of the religious life. They call any woman in vows “a nun”.
Nuns and monnks live an enclosed life of silence, solitude, prayer and community. The highlight of their life is the LOTH, which is the crown around the mass.
What do they do the rest of the day?
Very little. They are usually quite wealthy. Nuns and monks do not have private or personal property, but they have communal property, be it land, factories on their grounds, monastery schools or monastery colleges. These provide enough income for them to live.
They usually engage in some form of work three or four hours a day and that’s it. This can be anything from making vestments to making videos for EWTN. The rest of their day, when they’re not in chapel for adoration or the LOTH, they play tennis, golf, walk, write, read, do private prayer, engage in hobbies.
The focus of their life is Christ. They are not very interested in what happens out here. That’s not to say that they don’t care about us. Actually, they give up their entire life for their salvation and that of the world.
However, they are not interested in knowing every detail about the world outside of the monastery. For example, when the sexual abuse scandal broke, most of them thought it was a horrible thing. They prayed over it and talked about it for 20 minutes and moved on.
When people talk and worry about abuses in the liturgy, they just look at each other and say, “It’s not our problem.” Even this discussion about habits, to them it’s a joke. Some cloistered communities of men or women wear them and some don’t. Some wear then part of the time. This has nothing to do with them or their Church. Their Church is the Church of heaven.
To us, this sounds very strange to us. But they have been called to the highest form of religious life. They have been called to do two things.
a. To die a slow death on a cross, by submitting themselves to total and unquestioning obedience of the abbot or abbess.
b. To live like the angels and saints, in constant praise of God
Most monks and nuns never receive visitors and they never leave their houses. There are some who do: Benedictines, Visitandines and Poor Clares. Even these folks, leave their houses to do very specific tasks and then return.
Don’t misunderstand, nuns thoroughly enjoy themselves when they do go outside of the monastery. I remember Mother Angelica enjoying a good meal at a restaurant and enjoying sight-seeing when she was going around trying to raise funds for EWTN. I other words, they don’t hate the world or consider the world to be corrupt and sinful. Just the opposite. They love the world and they enjoy their encounters with the world, because they don’t pay attention to the negatives.
As you can see, the don’t engage in apostolic work. Their apostolate is to become saints.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
J
JReducation
Guest
I agree with this too and that’s why I wear my habit almost everywhere.
Mother was interesting. When she first started out, around 1946, few people knew that she was a sister. She looked like other Hindu women. As more sisters came, it became obvious that this was a community, because they all wore the same sari. Originally, no one could tell, because the sari is not the garb that people identified with women religious.
Mother chose the sari because Jesus told her that he wanted an Indian congregation. In Hindu culture, women wear saris, but men do not. They wear white shirts and slacks. So her male Missionaries of Charity dress like Hindu men. If you see 10 of them together you quickly realize that they are all wearing the same white shirt and slacks. If one of them were alone on the bus with you, you would probably think that he’s just another guy or another Hindu man.
What made the sari famous was Mother Teresa’s work and life. Had it not been for that, we might have seen a woman in a sari riding the metro and though that she was just another Hindu woman. Today, we identify it with Mother.
Moving right along, the problem that you’re going to find with orthodox religious is when the laity tries to demand that religious wear a habit, behave in a certain manner, engage in certain ministries or not engage in others. I’ll explain why you (universal you) have a problem.
For centuries, the laity manipulated religious communities for their own purposes. One of the most common means was to withhold funds from them. For example, Teresa of Avila was on the verge of a nervous breakdown, because they had to leave the cloister to go to Mrs. X’s home and “comfort” her, because she was pregnant. The nuns had to move in with Mrs. X until the lady gave birth or even longer. This took them away from the life of solitude and prayer to which Christ called them. They were forced to do this, because they depended on donations from the laity in order to eat.
Lay people subverted and even bought the votes of religious during a chapter to get a relative elected abbot or abbess. There were laws that you could not open a religious house without the permission of the king.
In the USA, many of our schools and hospitals have struggled to stay alive and most have died out, because the state passes laws that we can’t follow, because we don’t have the money or because they are contrary to Catholic faith. In many places, Catholics vote for these laws, knowing that they will bring the end to Catholic institutions run by religious. Look at the number of Catholics that voted for a pro-abortion government, not only in the USA but around the world. Madrid, once one of the most Catholic cities in the world, is the abortion capitol of Europe. Religious can no longer run hospitals and clinics in Madrid. It’s illegal to deny abortion, contraception and sterilization.
Things got so bad that the Council of Trent had to pass what is called The Right of Exemption. It’s a law that prohibits that bishops and laity interfere with religious of Pontifical Right. Religious of Pontifical Right, such as my Carmelite brothers and me are protected from bishops and laity by the pope. We answer to him and no one else. Trent had to do this to keep religious life from being manipulated, bought and sold at the will of wealthy laymen and bishops. Trent even prohibitted bishops from entering a religious house without the permission of the religious. That’s how strict things had to get. These laws are still in the books.
Think of how it sounds to a young religious, like Br. David, when a bishop cannot tell him what to wear or even go through his front door without the permission of the Prior, but in the meantime a layman is making demands on what he should or should not wear. It sounds discordant. It begs the question. “Wait a minute, no bishop can tell me what to wear and a layman wants to do so?”
It’s a knee-jerk reaction that many young religious have, because they know that if they were talking to the local bishop, this would not be a topic of conversation. The most a bishop can say is that he wants you to dress according to the rules and constitutions of your community. He’s not over stepping his bounds in saying that. It’s like me telling your child, “I want you to obey your mom and dad.” I’m not making rules for your child. Beyond that, the bishop can complain the the superior, if the religious are not living up to what their statutes say.
I work for a bishop. He can go off on me if I don’t do the work. As fars my clothing is concerned, the only thing that he ever said to me when we first met was, “Is that your habit?”
I said, “Yes, Your Excellency. Is there a problem?”
He responded, “No. That’s fine.”
Then I said, “Would Your Excellency prefer that I wear a Roman collar, because I can do so, if you wish it?”
He said, “No. That’s fine.”
When you have these kinds of exchanges with Church authorities and then you come here and get TOLD what to wear and not wear, it’s a little disturbing.
Does this help?
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
J
JReducation
Guest
I didn’t teach this, the monastic fathers did: Benedict, Bernard, Robert, and Romould.It makes me laugh that you refer listening and being obedient to one’s superior as dying slowly on the cross.
They are right. Surrendering your will to that of another, especially if the other is a fool and you know it, is a big penance.
In my order, the regulation is that you obey even when the superior is wrong. You don’t mention it. You just comply in silence. The only time you can disobey is if the superior tells you to sin.
I’ll give you an example of something that happened to me many years ago. I was helping a poor family rebuild their home after a flood. I came home late. I missed evening meal and evening prayer. The Guardian asked me where I had been and I told him. His answer was, “We don’t go around doing what we please just because it’s charitable to do so.”
Another time, I had to study for a theology test. The bell rang for dinner. I stayed at my desk about three minutes longer. I walked into the refectory when they were saying grace. After grace the superior called me over and asked why I was late. I explained that I had to finish this one chapter for my test the next day. He said, “That’s enough studying for tonight.” I said, “I have two more chapters to finish, may I do so?” He just looked at me and said, “I think you’ve studied enough.”
That was it. The next day, I failed the test. I had to take the course over.
As you can see, obedience is a cross.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
S
Sarahforgiven
Guest
Yes, great background & history lesson
A
ATeutonicKnight
Guest
I think we have established I could never join your order, because I would never put up with that. I would tell the superior what happened (Because in the first instance he obviously misunderstood), and if he told me I was doing what I pleased I would tell him working is definitely not doing what I please (Since I hate work), in which I would then be promptly kicked out.I didn’t teach this, the monastic fathers did: Benedict, Bernard, Robert, and Romould.
They are right. Surrendering your will to that of another, especially if the other is a fool and you know it, is a big penance.
In my order, the regulation is that you obey even when the superior is wrong. You don’t mention it. You just comply in silence. The only time you can disobey is if the superior tells you to sin.
I’ll give you an example of something that happened to me many years ago. I was helping a poor family rebuild their home after a flood. I came home late. I missed evening meal and evening prayer. The Guardian asked me where I had been and I told him. His answer was, “We don’t go around doing what we please just because it’s charitable to do so.”
Another time, I had to study for a theology test. The bell rang for dinner. I stayed at my desk about three minutes longer. I walked into the refectory when they were saying grace. After grace the superior called me over and asked why I was late. I explained that I had to finish this one chapter for my test the next day. He said, “That’s enough studying for tonight.” I said, “I have two more chapters to finish, may I do so?” He just looked at me and said, “I think you’ve studied enough.”
That was it. The next day, I failed the test. I had to take the course over.
As you can see, obedience is a cross.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
If by some miracle I wasn’t kicked out, in the second instance, I would explain what happened, the testers would tell me tough-luck, in which I would then just not do the course at all. If it was necessary, I would tell the superior where he could go, and that it wasn’t my fault. I was raised not to take anything from anybody, and it seems to have backfired in my particular case. It’s probably possible for me to humble myself a bit more, and to eventually be able to put up with that, but I really dread the thought.
It’s all in the humbling process, I suppose. But in my opinion, there’s a difference between being obedient and being a complete doormat. I think we should treat each other with respect. Your instances should never have happened, in my humble opinion, and I’m glad you have the heart to do it, because I certainly don’t. Maybe I should visit you one day and you can beat the obedience and humility into me.
J
JReducation
Guest
Then maybe Franciscan life is not for you. It’s all about obedience, the cross, detachment from self, and total submission. Poverty begins with the material things, but it does not stop there. One must also give up one’s pride, one’s love of self, one’s desire to be right, one’s idealism, one’s attachment to what one was taught in order to learn to live by pure faith and dependence on Divine Providence.I think we have established I could never join your order, because I would never put up with that. I would tell the superior what happened (Because in the first instance he obviously misunderstood), and if he told me I was doing what I pleased I would tell him working is definitely not doing what I please (Since I hate work), in which I would then be promptly kicked out.
If by some miracle I wasn’t kicked out, in the second instance, I would explain what happened, the testers would tell me tough-luck, in which I would then just not do the course at all. If it was necessary, I would tell the superior where he could go, and that it wasn’t my fault. I was raised not to take anything from anybody, and it seems to have backfired in my particular case. It’s probably possible for me to humble myself a bit more, and to eventually be able to put up with that, but I really dread the thought.
It’s all in the humbling process, I suppose. But in my opinion, there’s a difference between being obedient and being a complete doormat. I think we should treat each other with respect. Your instances should never have happened, in my humble opinion, and I’m glad you have the heart to do it, because I certainly don’t. Maybe I should visit you one day and you can beat the obedience and humility into me.
Respect has nothing to do with it. That’s a secular notion, not a Franciscan notion. Francis deeply respected his sons and daughters. The more obedient and foolish they were, the more he respected them for their simplicity. The real Franciscan is the man who is willing to be like Jesus.
Remember when Jesus is found in the temple and Mary scolds him. He explains why he’s there. But the Scripture also tells us that he left with them and was obedient to them, even though they were wrong and he was right.
Again at his trial. He knows that it’s a mockery of justice. But he submits, even though the Roman governor is wrong.
One cannot love totally, until one is totally poor. It’s not enough to give up your TV and iPod. The greatest treasure that a man has is his will. God will not strip that from us.
That’s what makes it the greatest gift that we can give to him, because free will is the only thing that God cannot take away from us. To surrender it to him, out of pure love, out of a desire to own nothing as Christ owned nothing, is priceless in God’s eyes.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
I would say that consecrated life is not for him as obedience is obedience. You do not do what ever you want to do in consecrated life. Some superiors might be more understanding but you never act disrespectfully towards one. You never tell them how it is, they tell you how it is.Then maybe Franciscan life is not for you. It’s all about obedience, the cross, detachment from self, and total submission. Poverty begins with the material things, but it does not stop there. One must also give up one’s pride, one’s love of self, one’s desire to be right, one’s idealism, one’s attachment to what one was taught in order to learn to live by pure faith and dependence on Divine Providence.
Respect has nothing to do with it. That’s a secular notion, not a Franciscan notion. Francis deeply respected his sons and daughters. The more obedient and foolish they were, the more he respected them for their simplicity. The real Franciscan is the man who is willing to be like Jesus.
Remember when Jesus is found in the temple and Mary scolds him. He explains why he’s there. But the Scripture also tells us that he left with them and was obedient to them, even though they were wrong and he was right.
Again at his trial. He knows that it’s a mockery of justice. But he submits, even though the Roman governor is wrong.
One cannot love totally, until one is totally poor. It’s not enough to give up your TV and iPod. The greatest treasure that a man has is his will. God will not strip that from us.
That’s what makes it the greatest gift that we can give to him, because free will is the only thing that God cannot take away from us. To surrender it to him, out of pure love, out of a desire to own nothing as Christ owned nothing, is priceless in God’s eyes.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
One of the ways religious look at it is that it is the voice of the Holy Spirit coming to us through the superior. If one thinks they can tell God how it is then religious life is not for them.
A
ATeutonicKnight
Guest
I could probably do it, but I would probably have to bite my tongue for the first month as I got used to it. I have no problem with people making their decisions for me, and me doing what they say unquestioningly (That’s what being a son is, right?), but if they’re wrong, it’s going to be challenging. Obedience may be dying slowly on the cross, but trying not to say anything is a nail to the foot.Then maybe Franciscan life is not for you. It’s all about obedience, the cross, detachment from self, and total submission. Poverty begins with the material things, but it does not stop there. One must also give up one’s pride, one’s love of self, one’s desire to be right, one’s idealism, one’s attachment to what one was taught in order to learn to live by pure faith and dependence on Divine Providence.
Respect has nothing to do with it. That’s a secular notion, not a Franciscan notion. Francis deeply respected his sons and daughters. The more obedient and foolish they were, the more he respected them for their simplicity. The real Franciscan is the man who is willing to be like Jesus.
Remember when Jesus is found in the temple and Mary scolds him. He explains why he’s there. But the Scripture also tells us that he left with them and was obedient to them, even though they were wrong and he was right.
Again at his trial. He knows that it’s a mockery of justice. But he submits, even though the Roman governor is wrong.
One cannot love totally, until one is totally poor. It’s not enough to give up your TV and iPod. The greatest treasure that a man has is his will. God will not strip that from us.
That’s what makes it the greatest gift that we can give to him, because free will is the only thing that God cannot take away from us. To surrender it to him, out of pure love, out of a desire to own nothing as Christ owned nothing, is priceless in God’s eyes.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
R
ringil
Guest
I just have to say it Brother, you know EVERYTHING!!If she was receiving the habit, she was not making vows. You receive the habit when you become a novice. By the time that a nun makes solemn vows, she has been in the habit for at least five years.
Did you see a profession of vows or an investiture?
You are quite right, the Poor Clares are nuns. Nuns always live in cloisters. The women religious that teach, nurse, work in parishes, etc are sisters. They make different vows from those of nuns. Nuns make the same vows as friars and monks.
Sisters make the same vows as congregatioins of men. There are also consecrated women who are not sisters, even though we call them Sister as part of their title. These are called Institutes of Apostolic Life. These are not consecrated women religious. They often wear a habit or not, they make vows or not, but are not consecrated religious. They are neither sisters nor nuns. The Sisters of Schonstatt (sp?) are not sisters of nuns. The Daughters of Charity are not sisters or nuns. The Sisters of Charity of St. Vincent de Paul are neither sisters nor nuns. There are a few others that I can’t recall right now.
On another subject, before you blow up at Br. David, try to look at what you wrote.
There are two kinds of tradition and you’re blending them in this paragraph. There is the faith that was handed down to us through the apostles. That’s the Christian Tradition, also known as the Apostolic Tradition or the Tradition of the Fathers, since they received it first.
Then there are traditions withn insitutions. These are disciplines and customs. They don’t have the weight of Tradition. They are not part of our faith. Religious life is part of our faith. What religious wear, how they work, how they live or the different kinds of religious, is not part of our faith. Therefore, we don’t include those things under the umbrella of Tradition. They are customs or disciplines.
Brother is saying that you need to keep them separate. The Assumption of Mary is essential to the Christian life. The habit of a religious is not. It is accidental. Don’t blend the essential and the accidental.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
I’m just kidding but I always learn something new with your posts! Thanks for sharing your knowledge regarding religious life with us.
God Bless
R
ringil
Guest
Please use one profile. It keeps things simpler.
A
ATeutonicKnight
Guest
Every time I used the other profile it was an accident because I forgot I was logged into it, and after I posted the message I was too lazy to delete it and type another message on this one. I’m sorry for the confusion.
- Status