Misconceptions and Stereotypes of Religious Life?

[littletherese3]

I don’t like to hear stereotypes of anyone, but it really gets me when people say “beloved priests” and other “holier than thou” stereotypes. I’ve met some mean, bad religious people, who don’t think twice about giving the cold shoulder or turning a blind eye to pain/suffering. Give me a break. When our nun consistently leaves mass early or walks out of opening of exposition, you know you have problems.

When I said “beloved priests” I was refering to the not-guilty ones (in the way you are meaning). I don’t mean that they are holier-than-thou. I just feel sorry for the ones who are stereotyped to be like the ones you were describing, but aren’t- “mean, bad religious people, who don’t think twice about giving the cold shoulder or turning a blind eye to pain/suffering”.

 

[Jennifer_G]

What I knew of nuns was what I saw from Mother Teresa or Sister Act. I thought they all wore habits, hid in convents all day or taught school, etc. Imagine my surprise when working at Disney World and a group of nuns came through my ride!

I’ve always thought of nuns as doing charity work, visiting hospitals (always nuns in a white habit), teaching and going into the community from time to time. 90% of the time, they had habits like those in Sister Act. (from watching movies - Mass was always pre-Vatican II, as well). I always thought they were both cloistered and did those things - maybe that’s semi-cloistered. You can imagine I was wondering where the nuns were when I first became Catholic. Granted, most of them don’t even wear habits anymore…

 

[goforgoal]

Hmm, let me see some of the misconceptions I’ve heard. Yes even from Catholic’s

Nuns are quiet, they are all virgins, they all wear long habits and veils.

Priests like young boys to be altar servers since the priests are child abusers or pedophiles.

I think that many nuns and priests are stereotyped in films.

 

[JReducation]

When non Catholics make incorrect statements about religious and religious life it’s understandable. The media is their point of reference. When Catholics do it, it is sad. It means that the Church has done a poor job in her education or the laity is not interested in understanding.

There are some misconceptions that I often correct on these forums.

1. Priests are religious. The answer is not always. Religious life and the priesthood are two different callings and two different sacraments. The priesthood is the Sacrament of Holy Orders. Religious life is a public consecration to live one’s baptism in a more intense manner through a life consecrated to God alone, within the context of a religious family. Some men are called to both.
2. Religious brothers are a step below priests. Again, the answer is false. A religious brother is a man who consecrates his life to Christ and the Church through the public profession of the evangelical counsels: poverty, obedience, and chastity. He embraces a way of life that based on the Gospel and is directed or governed by the rule and constitutions of his community. He stands among the faithful as Christ did, one among many brothers. He leads others to Christ through his fraternal ministry and on-going life of penance and the perfection of charity. This is a very different call from the call to minister to God’s people through the sacraments and governing, which is the call of the priest.
3. Deacons are lay men. False. Deacons are clerics, just like priests and bishops. Once a man is ordained there is an ontological mark on his soul that cannot be undone even if he is laicized.
4. You can throw a priest or religious out if they commit a sin. Wrong. You can suspend a priest. You can dispense him from his promise of celibacy and obedience to the bishop. This process is called laicization. But the priest remains a priest forever. He lives among the laity. That is the actual meaning of laicization. Living among the laity does not make him a lay man, even if he gets married and is in good standing with the Church. A religious makes perpetual vows. The sin of the religious does not annul the vows. He or she still bound by the vows and must do whatever is necessary to rectify his or her situation so as to fulfill his or her commitment to God, the religious community and the Church. A dispensation from vows, even when one is dismissed from a religious institute, is a serious matter and the Church does not proceed lightly on doing this. Nor does the Church encourage the Major Superiors of religious institutes to dismiss religious until such time as the behavior becomes so obstinate that the religious superior can do nothing more to help the religious. It is the duty of the Major Superior to help the brothers or sisters in the community rise from the sinful situation before considering expulsion from the institute.
5. Secular Orders are not real orders. Wrong. There are different kinds of secular orders. Some have a profession, rule, constitution, and a canonical place in the Church. They are public associations, just like any other religious and secular institute. Once you have made final profession in a Secular Order that has a solemn commitment: vows, promises or other, you are bound to that way of life until death. Some secular orders are not bound by a profession. These share in the spiritual life of a religious family. Normally, they are not called a secular order, but a third order. Some third orders are secular orders and some are societies of lay faithful who guide themselves according to the spirit of a religious family. There is a difference between them, including their formation. The first secular order approved by the Catholic Church was the Secular Franciscan Order in 1221. From this model, all other secular orders took their form and governance. The SFO is a real order with a real formation period that takes almost five-years before making final profession. It follows the formation schema of the other Franciscan orders. The same is true for the Secular Carmelites and Secular Dominicans. They are real orders with a canonical place in the Church and their members enjoy a place of distinction in the structure of the Church.
6. Secular Institutes are not a consecrated way of life. Wrong again. Secular institutes are one of the four ways of life that the Church recognizes as living a consecrated life by vows or solemn promises. The difference between a secular institute and a religious institute is not in the vows or in the formation. It is in the way that they exercise their ministry. Secular institutes are to be anonymous, whereas religious institutes and secular orders are to be public (visible).

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Sister_Leocadia]

Oh my gosh! Where do I start?!

I think both Catholics and non-Catholics are surprised when they see how young I am. Being 26 (or at least under 50) and a nun is, I think, an unusual thing in England, certainly outside the larger cities anyway. I’ve been shouted at in the street by people who wanted to know if I was a “real” nun or if it was a fancy-dress costume!:getholy:

Also most people are amazed when they see me doing day to day things like buying a sandwich or looking through clothing items to see if I can find my size. I suppose they must think that all nuns stay in convents and pray all day or teach little Catholic children.:bible1:

I can’t stand people saying that women become nuns if they can’t find a boyfriend/husband. I didn’t have a boyfriend before I went to Slovakia to become a postulant when I was 18 but I had been asked out by several boys I knew at school and at college. I just knew I would become a nun so saying “no” was the natural thing to do.

I suppose I’m conspicuous as I wear a pretty traditional black habit with a long black veil that covers my hair and my ears. The habit is floor length and I have a rope cincture so I think I look very typically “nunnish!”:nun2: