Seen To Be

[BarbTherese]

My thoughts below were prompted by another thread - and I almost posted there but thankfully decided not to do so at "the last minute" for important reasons of my own and decided to start a new thread instead.

There are many things I would work to raise money to try to accomplish - important and urgent pressing survival needs in our world. When I was in religious life, I never lived so well in such beautiful surroundings - I never ate so well with an abundance of good food (often in trouble for not eating, but I simply couldn't eat because I wasn't hungry). I have never been so free of worries and concerns survival connected. I never had so much spiritual support and blessings so available. And in religious life I have never dressed so well either since I love the religious habit - denied to me in private vows. I did and do ponder over monies spent within cloistered life (for one) that could have been put to very pressing survival needs in our world. I had all I needed and more for a good life - I just could not call it mine..........happily I am still in that position and seen to be. I have heard many many points of view about (to my mind) unnecessary monies spent building and furnishing and decorating "The Lord's House" - "The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: 21 Neither shall they say: Behold here, or behold there. For lo, the kingdom of God is within you." http://www.drbo.org/...h=17&l=21& f=s#x
By "unnecessary monies", I mean spending monies on what is clearly a luxury since there is a far cheaper option available of equal merit. I think personally that a far better witness would be given to the world if religious having taking a vow of poverty were seen to be.

I love religious life etc. with a passion - I just wonder over some things in some of its expressions sometimes and did find within myself that I could not come to terms interiorly with some things - and one of the reasons I made private vows in order to live my own expression of each of the vows in a specific lifestyle or way of life (approved by priest director/confessor and privately by an archbishop in personal handwriting on diocesan letterhead) which is very very far from anything remotely connected to perfection - but at least I can sight clearly what I am aiming for as of worth, if there are very real problems about living a life alone under private vows and at times survival problems.
I do know of one happy experience within my once religious community. Mother General visited and of course the kitchen was busy day and night preparing a great feast, consulting special recipes etc. working over hot stoves etc. The feast was duly served, but Mother General on sighting it sent it all back to the kitchen stating: "Religious do not eat like this!" Go Mother G - onya!

Barb

Edited November 13, 2009 by BarbaraTherese

[humbleheart]

[quote name='BarbaraTherese' date='13 November 2009 - 02:55 AM' timestamp='1258077309' post='2001592']
I do know of one happy experience within my once religious community. Mother General visited and of course the kitchen was busy day and night preparing a great feast, consulting special recipes etc. working over hot stoves etc. The feast was duly served, but Mother General on sighting it sent it all back to the kitchen stating: "Religious do not eat like this!" Go Mother G - onya!

Barb
[/quote]

I believe in the importance of simplicity, and if and when I enter a monastery I know that holy poverty will be something special to me. But I think that all simplicity and poverty has to include an element of gratitude. I remember how St Teresa of Avila ate all the fine food that she was served when she was compelled to stay for a while in the houses of rich and important people, even though she found all the luxury distressing. Sending away the food that your sisters have worked so hard over doesn't seem to be any more in keeping with the spirit of poverty than eating such food every day would be - especially if the meal was a present for their superior, someone whom they respect and want to honour.

[MithLuin]

I think the tension of this question is one that is dealt with by continuous renewal in religious communities. It is easy to become complacent, to take luxuries for granted. St. Francis considered Lady Poverty a lady he had to pursue always, if he wished to remain faithful to her. You can never reach a point where you say 'I've arrived; now we are living gospel poverty, and need not concern ourselves over it any longer.'

On the other hand, charity and hospitality insist that we extend ourselves to offer the best that we have to those who visit us (and to our Lord), and that we graciously accept what is given to us through the generosity of others. Not everyone can join a religious community or be a missionary, but by the humble acceptance of these people, others may participate in their ministry and mission and life.

Sometimes we feel bad for taking things we didn't work for. In those situations, it is best to be very free with our thanks, letting those who were so generous to us know that we appreciate them, and letting the Lord know that we depend on Him for all things. If we lose this attitude of gratitude, our way of living out poverty becomes cold and disconnected from the human community. If it is truly something we do not need, we may then turn around and gift it to someone else who can make use of it.

Poverty of spirit is more about being willing to sleep on the floor than actually sleeping on the floor. Meaning, you are truly detached when it is not important to you whether you are sleeping on the floor or in a bed, whether you are eating cheesecake or moldy bagels, etc. Denying yourself is important, and unconditional acceptance of others' generosity will (sometimes) lead to a lifestyle that is not in line with the humble poverty called for in the vows of religious life.

As far as the habit goes - it is generally inexpensive for those communities that make their own, and rather pricey for those communities who have them custom made. Not every community has a $300 habit! But even if it is the case that the habit is pricey, it is a wonderful sign of the vows and I can understand why communities of sisters don't just go with cheap white blouses and black skirts all around - by losing the uniformity, you lose the external signs of connection to the group. And if you only have to buy one, and that's what you wear for years....well, in the end, it's not [i]that[/i] expensive.

But it is a tension, a balance - it is not true that radical poverty is the best or only expression of these vows, nor is that the best or only way to serve Christ. Living out poverty means denial and taking up your cross...and following Jesus, wherever He may lead. He has led you to making your vows privately, and I pray he grants you the grace to live them out.

[FSM Sister]

[quote]And if you only have to buy one, and that's what you wear for years....well, in the end, it's not [i]that[/i] expensive. [/quote]

[img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/sweat.gif[/img][img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/lol.gif[/img] [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/lol_roll.gif[/img]
Seriously - I don't know of any communities in which you only have [i]one[/i] habit! We laughed until we cried when the parish priest thought as much. What would the sisters wear on laundry day? (No mental pictures, please!) My community is fairly spartan, and we have four habits:
1. Feast day habit - worn only on the highest feasts of the year: Easter, Christmas, Profession of Vows, and maybe one other day specified by the superior.
2. Sunday habit
3. Daily habit/communion habit (worn until after the morning mass, then the work habit is worn the rest of the day).
4. Work habit.

[Nunsense]

[quote name='FSM Sister' date='17 November 2009 - 11:57 AM' timestamp='1258419463' post='2004010']
[img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/sweat.gif[/img][img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/lol.gif[/img] [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/lol_roll.gif[/img]
Seriously - I don't know of any communities in which you only have [i]one[/i] habit! We laughed until we cried when the parish priest thought as much. What would the sisters wear on laundry day? (No mental pictures, please!) My community is fairly spartan, and we have four habits:
1. Feast day habit - worn only on the highest feasts of the year: Easter, Christmas, Profession of Vows, and maybe one other day specified by the superior.
2. Sunday habit
3. Daily habit/communion habit (worn until after the morning mass, then the work habit is worn the rest of the day).
4. Work habit.
[/quote]


You may well laugh, Sister, but we only had one habit each in Carmel! We had one for summer and one for winter, and they were washed once a year. Now before that grosses everyone out, we had three under tunics and three toques which were changed every week. One would be worn, one would be in the wash and one would be for the weekly changeover because the tunic wash was done only every two weeks (on the alternate week, the linen wash would be done). But the habit itself and the cottee (the underskirt) were only changed at the start of winter or summer seasons. We had two veils, one for everyday and one for Sunday.

In Edmonton Carmel, which was founded from the Macau Carmel, they had a slightly different arrangement. The had a "work cassock" which they changed into prior to any work, and which they changed out of for the Office or Mass. It was a little time consuming to keep changing, but they started this in Macau where the habit couldn't be worn all the time because of the heat. The work cassock is a light weight cotton shift dress with a belt, and much lighter and cooler than the full habit. The funny thing is that they don't really need it now in Canada, but they are so used to it, that they keep it. They only had the one habit though, one for summer and one for winter.

I think the active communities must have more habits because of the work they do, and their interaction with others in the world. But the Carmels I was in didn't have four habits by any means.

[FSM Sister]

[quote]When I was in religious life, I never lived so well in such beautiful surroundings - I never ate so well with an abundance of good food (often in trouble for not eating, but I simply couldn't eat because I wasn't hungry). I have never been so free of worries and concerns survival connected. I never had so much spiritual support and blessings so available. And in religious life I have never dressed so well either since I love the religious habit - denied to me in private vows. I did and do ponder over monies spent within cloistered life (for one) that could have been put to very pressing survival needs in our world. I had all I needed and more for a good life - I just could not call it mine..........happily I am still in that position and seen to be. I have heard many many points of view about (to my mind) unnecessary monies spent building and furnishing and decorating "The Lord's House" - "The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: 21 Neither shall they say: Behold here, or behold there. For lo, the kingdom of God is within you." [url="http://www.drbo.org/...h=17&l=21&"][color="#284b72"]http://www.drbo.org/...g/...h=17&l=21& [/color][/url]f=s#x
By "unnecessary monies", I mean spending monies on what is clearly a luxury since there is a far cheaper option available of equal merit. I think personally that a far better witness would be given to the world if religious having taking a vow of poverty were seen to be. [/quote]

Barb, I concur 100% (and so do most of the regular folks in the pew.) When I see the lavishness with which some of the more high profile communities are stylin' (especially in the U.S.) it gives me pause. Maybe it's just my Franciscan spirituality, but I'm edified when I meet religious who make do with little, and scandalized when I meet religious who live in surroundings so much more luxurious than the very people whom they serve. Our sisters have a rule that they cannot live in better surroundings than the people they serve, and so our sisters in one area have a dirt floor and wear no shoes because they work in a parish where dirt floors are the norm, and very few parishioners can afford shoes. Our sisters in another area which is rather affluent, wouldn't think of living in a convent with a dirt floor or going barefoot. Each is suited for the place they are serving. If that is not the practice with your former community, then you are better off (spiritually) as a woman in private vows, wearing your habit on the interior. I support you 100% and firmly believe that those who are denied the priviledge of wearing the habit, living in community, and public vows are asked to make reparation for those who have all those outward signs and have lost their first love. Which is living more closely like our Lady? There were many royal women strolling about the cloistered walks of their palaces during our Lady's lifetime, yet none so dear to the Heart of God as the humble, obscure virgin from Nazareth who said, "Let it be done unto me according to Thy Word."

[laetitia crucis]

[quote name='nunsense' date='16 November 2009 - 09:15 PM' timestamp='1258420507' post='2004032']
You may well laugh, Sister, but we only had one habit each in Carmel! We had one for summer and one for winter, and they were washed once a year. Now before that grosses everyone out, we had three under tunics and three toques which were changed every week. One would be worn, one would be in the wash and one would be for the weekly changeover because the tunic wash was done only every two weeks (on the alternate week, the linen wash would be done). But the habit itself and the cottee (the underskirt) were only changed at the start of winter or summer seasons. We had two veils, one for everyday and one for Sunday.

In Edmonton Carmel, which was founded from the Macau Carmel, they had a slightly different arrangement. The had a "work cassock" which they changed into prior to any work, and which they changed out of for the Office or Mass. It was a little time consuming to keep changing, but they started this in Macau where the habit couldn't be worn all the time because of the heat. The work cassock is a light weight cotton shift dress with a belt, and much lighter and cooler than the full habit. The funny thing is that they don't really need it now in Canada, but they are so used to it, that they keep it. They only had the one habit though, one for summer and one for winter.

I think the active communities must have more habits because of the work they do, and their interaction with others in the world. But the Carmels I was in didn't have four habits by any means.
[/quote]


Thanks for telling us your habit-experience in Carmel, nunsense! I must admit, I'm usually a tad curious about other community's/order's laundry schedule.

In the active community I was with (which wore full-length habits), we had two habits once we were professed. As novices, we only had one habit (including one veil); however, were given a hand-me-down habit as a "work habit" for any particular "dirty jobs" we might need one for, like washing the cars, gardening, or anything involving bleach.

We washed our habits once a week. And honestly, it wasn't bad at all (unless you spend the day in the kitchen cooking extra-potent foods).

Even though I tend to be a rather clumsy person, I'm glad we only had two habits. I made sure to be extra mindful of my habit and what I was doing in it. I'd say it taught me to more responsible. Especially when you're playing with kids or around often-rotted donated fruits and veggies. Haha!!

[FSM Sister]

[quote]...we only had one habit each in Carmel! We had one for summer and one for winter, and they were washed once a year. Now before that grosses everyone out, we had three under tunics and three toques which were changed every week. One would be worn, one would be in the wash and one would be for the weekly changeover because the tunic wash was done only every two weeks (on the alternate week, the linen wash would be done). But the habit itself and the cottee (the underskirt) were only changed at the start of winter or summer seasons. We had two veils, one for everyday and one for Sunday.[/quote]

We are probably meaning the same thing yet using different nomenclature. Under tunics - what are those, exactly? If it is more like a tunic worn under what you are calling a habit, then your habit is more like a coat (and most people have two coats, one for summer and one for winter).

In my active community, the "habit" is more like a dress than outerwear. We washed the habits worn daily once a week. Sunday habits were washed 2-3 times a year, or as needed. I could go 5-6 YEARS between washing the Feast Day habit.

So yes, I will go ahead and laugh... [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/saint.gif[/img] It was a funny post. Don't lose too much sleep over this! [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/yawn.gif[/img]

Edited November 17, 2009 by FSM Sister

[Piccoli Fiori JMJ]

As I understand, the Poor Clare Colettines have 4 habits... two for summer (work & 'dress' habits) and two for winter (the same). Back in the day, they had only one made out of heavy wool to wear year round.

[BarbTherese]

[quote name='humbleheart' date='14 November 2009 - 12:58 AM' timestamp='1258122482' post='2002098']
I believe in the importance of simplicity, and if and when I enter a monastery I know that holy poverty will be something special to me. But I think that all simplicity and poverty has to include an element of gratitude. I remember how St Teresa of Avila ate all the fine food that she was served when she was compelled to stay for a while in the houses of rich and important people, even though she found all the luxury distressing. Sending away the food that your sisters have worked so hard over doesn't seem to be any more in keeping with the spirit of poverty than eating such food every day would be - especially if the meal was a present for their superior, someone whom they respect and want to honour.
[/quote]


Hi Humbleheart...........You have make a good and valid point. Perhaps there was tension with Mother General between the attitude of St. Teresa in eating chicken and her duties as Mother General of the Order towards her charges. I certainly appreciated her decision...........Barb

[BarbTherese]

[quote name='MithLuin' date='16 November 2009 - 11:12 AM' timestamp='1258332143' post='2003405']
I think the tension of this question is one that is dealt with by continuous renewal in religious communities. It is easy to become complacent, to take luxuries for granted. St. Francis considered Lady Poverty a lady he had to pursue always, if he wished to remain faithful to her. You can never reach a point where you say 'I've arrived; now we are living gospel poverty, and need not concern ourselves over it any longer.'

On the other hand, charity and hospitality insist that we extend ourselves to offer the best that we have to those who visit us (and to our Lord), and that we graciously accept what is given to us through the generosity of others. Not everyone can join a religious community or be a missionary, but by the humble acceptance of these people, others may participate in their ministry and mission and life.

Sometimes we feel bad for taking things we didn't work for. In those situations, it is best to be very free with our thanks, letting those who were so generous to us know that we appreciate them, and letting the Lord know that we depend on Him for all things. If we lose this attitude of gratitude, our way of living out poverty becomes cold and disconnected from the human community. If it is truly something we do not need, we may then turn around and gift it to someone else who can make use of it.

Poverty of spirit is more about being willing to sleep on the floor than actually sleeping on the floor. Meaning, you are truly detached when it is not important to you whether you are sleeping on the floor or in a bed, whether you are eating cheesecake or moldy bagels, etc. Denying yourself is important, and unconditional acceptance of others' generosity will (sometimes) lead to a lifestyle that is not in line with the humble poverty called for in the vows of religious life.

As far as the habit goes - it is generally inexpensive for those communities that make their own, and rather pricey for those communities who have them custom made. Not every community has a $300 habit! But even if it is the case that the habit is pricey, it is a wonderful sign of the vows and I can understand why communities of sisters don't just go with cheap white blouses and black skirts all around - by losing the uniformity, you lose the external signs of connection to the group. And if you only have to buy one, and that's what you wear for years....well, in the end, it's not [i]that[/i] expensive.

But it is a tension, a balance - it is not true that radical poverty is the best or only expression of these vows, nor is that the best or only way to serve Christ. Living out poverty means denial and taking up your cross...and following Jesus, wherever He may lead. He has led you to making your vows privately, and I pray he grants you the grace to live them out.
[/quote]


More good and valid points. I guess determination rests on the particular call that one has received.

Thank you for the comments,MithLuin............Barb

[BarbTherese]

[quote name='FSM Sister' date='17 November 2009 - 11:52 AM' timestamp='1258420963' post='2004042']
Barb, I concur 100% (and so do most of the regular folks in the pew.) When I see the lavishness with which some of the more high profile communities are stylin' (especially in the U.S.) it gives me pause. Maybe it's just my Franciscan spirituality, but I'm edified when I meet religious who make do with little, and scandalized when I meet religious who live in surroundings so much more luxurious than the very people whom they serve. Our sisters have a rule that they cannot live in better surroundings than the people they serve, and so our sisters in one area have a dirt floor and wear no shoes because they work in a parish where dirt floors are the norm, and very few parishioners can afford shoes. Our sisters in another area which is rather affluent, wouldn't think of living in a convent with a dirt floor or going barefoot. Each is suited for the place they are serving. If that is not the practice with your former community, then you are better off (spiritually) as a woman in private vows, wearing your habit on the interior. I support you 100% and firmly believe that those who are denied the priviledge of wearing the habit, living in community, and public vows are asked to make reparation for those who have all those outward signs and have lost their first love. Which is living more closely like our Lady? There were many royal women strolling about the cloistered walks of their palaces during our Lady's lifetime, yet none so dear to the Heart of God as the humble, obscure virgin from Nazareth who said, "Let it be done unto me according to Thy Word."
[/quote]


It is of concern to me that very often The Church is seen to be wealthy and people outside The Church looking in make their determination by what is "seen to be" and many of our monasteries for exmaple are stunning places - grounds and buildings, chapels/churches.........and often cannot understand nor reconcile a vow of poverty with such luxury. I think personally (and my personal call)is to be "seen to be". Until recently (government authority have shifted me) I lived in a very poor area indeed beset by social problems of probably all kinds.......Catholic accommodation etc. in the area (religious and priests) far outstripped the 'tone of the area'. This does give the impression that The Church is wealthy and that priests, religious and nun live very well indeed by comparison. I think it is important that we are "seen to be" - and cannot blame those outside The Church especially who conclude that the Catholic Church is wealthy. For example in the area I spoke of, Catholic assistance to the poor was quite poor. While The Anglican Church was truly outstanding in the help they extended and quite visibly. I dont think we can blame them for concluding that a vow of poverty is questionable. And I do understand the true essence of poverty. What I am addressing is should religious be "seen to be"..........and perhaps especially in an age where there is a call to evangelize.

Thank you for the comments.

I have to go out and so will address any other comments later at some point.

Barb

[FSM Sister]

[quote name='BarbaraTherese' date='17 November 2009 - 05:23 PM' timestamp='1258496588' post='2004431']
It is of concern to me that very often The Church is seen to be wealthy and people outside The Church looking in make their determination by what is "seen to be" and many of our monasteries for exmaple are stunning places - grounds and buildings, chapels/churches.........and often cannot understand nor reconcile a vow of poverty with such luxury. ... I dont think we can blame them for concluding that a vow of poverty is questionable. And I do understand the true essence of poverty. What I am addressing is should religious be "seen to be"..........and perhaps especially in an age where there is a call to evangelize.

\[/quote]


Barb, I think you are "spot on." What did Jesus say to the rich young man? "If you want to be perfect..." And just for the record, there is not much difference in a person's life between "actually having" and "having the use of." The subtle difference is that you can't pass it down to your blood relations in your will. What do I think of religious who live pretty high on the hog? I don't really think it's going to fly on judgement day. Our novice mistress very wisely used to say, "Poverty isn't poverty unless you [i]feel[/i] it. When you examine your conscience every day/evening, can you identify the way in which you [i]felt[/i] poverty today? Likewise, in what way did you fulfill your vow of chastity or obedience? Can you truthfully say to Jesus, 'I have purified myself of ____ today,' or 'I shared in Your lonliness today,' or 'I surrendered my will in _____ today'?"

Poverty isn't accomplished in a single act of renouncing worldly goods; neither is purity accomplished by foregoing marriage and family; nor is the daily surrenduring of your will ever complete. We renew our vows daily by the practice of the evangelical counsels. Poverty [i]in fact[/i] (i.e., in truth)leads to poverty in spirit. Purity [i]in fact[/i] leads to purity of heart and soul. Obedience [i]in truth[/i] leads to perfection. We worship [i]in spirit [/i]and[i] in truth.
[/i]
But in the final analysis, my Toyota takes me to the same church as Sister XYZ's Lexus, and so what if she turns heads in her $300 habit and I turn noses in my $35 habit? Our Lord has given me one call and her another. He owns the vineyard, and is free to be as generous to the laborers who worked one hour as He is to the laborers who agreed to work all day in the blazing sun. This is what we signed up for. So even though I agree wholeheartedly with Barb, it could be that this is what God has revealed to us, and is our vocation. There seems to be religious in just about every economic strata, and we surely can't see things as completely as God sees them. Still, it seems mighty ironic to me that we all claim to be poor. The Missionaries of Charity are one of the poorest groups, yet they do not have "poor" in their title. Other communities have "poor" in their title, and live quite well. (I'm sure there are some, but off hand I can't think of any communities with the word "Pure" or "Obedient" in their title.) [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/saint.gif[/img]

Edited November 18, 2009 by FSM Sister

[Saint Therese]

I think its important to remember that not all communities have the same expression of the ideal of poverty.

[zunshynn]

[quote name='Saint Therese' date='17 November 2009 - 06:33 PM' timestamp='1258507983' post='2004596']
I think its important to remember that not all communities have the same expression of the ideal of poverty.
[/quote]

I agree... it's also important to keep in mind that, depending on what a community's apostolate is, they will have different needs as far as what is appropriate for their habit. A community that does a lot of work with the poor, for example, where they may get particularly dirty, may need more habits than a sisters in a contemplative monastery.

I don't really know how much the materials for my habits cost, although I think it would qualify as poor material. I did not get the scratchiest, hottest fabric, either. Mine was made of fabric that was relatively airy, and comfortable to me. Was I not being sacrificial enough? Maybe... I don't know. I really didn't think too much about it... life is pretty short... would God have wanted me to concentrate more on the specifics of how I practiced poverty? I kind of doubt it... I think He would have preferred that I think about Him than about what material my habit was made out of. If I had gotten really itchy material, would that austerity have made me holier? What if I was so uncomfortable I wasn't able to concentrate on Jesus or putting my best effort into my work because all I could think about was how itchy I felt? I don't know... part of me thinks that is a different form of self-centeredness that doesn't help one's relationship with God. But maybe I'm wrong, and that was a serious problem. For all I know, not fully and wholeheartedly practicing poverty that religious life entails, especially as a Franciscan, could have cost me my vocation, if I did actually have one to religious life.

I had two while I was at OLAM, and that was sufficient, although there were times, especially as an extern, when I thought three would be really good to have, because I had significantly less time to do laundry. There were some sisters that, due to the seamstresses being extremely busy, only had one until their first profession. It might be uneconomical for some communities to make their own habits. I needed to wash my habits weekly, sometimes biweekly. I don't think that means that I was practicing poverty any less than the sisters that could go two or three weeks. For me, that was necessary to take proper care of my habit. For various reasons, others may not have found that necessary.

And also, sometimes getting the least expensive materials to make the habits will be self-defeating. If it's material that is so inexpensive that it will not last, it will have to be replaced more frequently, which may end up costing a lot more overall, than if a habit was made with slightly better material, so it would last longer. Personally, I can't think of any reason why any habit would cost $300 dollars. Perhaps there are some out there, but I can't imagine that's the norm anywhere. It's also quite possible for a habit to simply be made very well and look like it could be more expensive, when in fact the material is poor.

Every community is going to be different, though. I have misgivings about the purpose of comparing the poverty of their habits... because the way poverty is practiced pertaining to the habit in one order not be the best way for another community to practice poverty. Like mithluin said, "Poverty of spirit is more about being willing to sleep on the floor than actually sleeping on the floor." It's important for poverty to be practiced too, with respect for obedience, rather than insisting on practicing greater austerity because that is what one personally sees as in accord with poverty. Insisting on keeping socks full of holes and worn thin because that is greater practice of poverty when one's superior has asked them to get new ones, for example, is not [i]really[/i] practicing poverty... at least not with the blessing of God.

I wonder if, while of course it would not be good to spend a lot of time worrying about how nice one looks and everything, if it really is beneficial to go to the opposite extreme of trying to "look poor". That seems like just another way to focus on oneself rather than on God, and also may sometimes lack gratitude for what God gives, in a mad chase to practice more austerity... for what purpose, ultimately?

Just my .02

Edited November 18, 2009 by zunshynn

[BarbTherese]

[quote name='Saint Therese' date='18 November 2009 - 12:03 PM' timestamp='1258507983' post='2004596']
I think its important to remember that not all communities have the same expression of the ideal of poverty.
[/quote]


This is very true I think and essentially poverty is about poverty of spirit. Ideally, to my mind (and mind you, I am outside of religious life per se or as it is commonly understood) the vows of poverty, chastity and obedience should have an element of "seen to be"...........while it remains entirely possible for a religious to indeed be seen to be poor, chaste and obedient, and yet never arrive or approach that essential poverty, chastity and obedience of spirit. Hence, ideally, and to my mind, a religious is seen to be (in a literal sense as it were) by virtue of the structure in which she is living and as poor, chaste and obedient, and is in an interior senses striving to be poor, chaste and obedient in spirit.
It is also, of course, quite possible to have wealth and yet be poor, chaste and obedient in spirit. We have recently celebrated the feastdays of St. Margaret of Scotland and Elizabeth of Hungary - both queens who lived as if they "had not" as far as worldly wealth was concerned. I think one of them (memory often fails me) was careful to always dress well so as not to embarrass her husband in a public sense and of course the king - and this was absolutely virtuous.
What is concerning to me is that those outside Catholicism can and do note (if they are exposed to it) just how well some religious and priests do live (and of course priests do not make a vow of poverty, although I dont think this is really commonly understood).
Outsiders (including Catholics outside of religious life) can find the conditions under which some religious and priests do live as contradictory. And what I am saying is that especially in an age of, and we are asked to focus on, evangelization..........some are perceiving double standards within the very structures that represent in a witnessing manner to the best of Catholic life - i.e. religious and priesthood. The Catholic Church generally is perceived to be materially wealthy often due to what others see as evidence of material wealth and in those who stand for what is the best and 'highest' in Catholic life - our priests, nuns and religious. Of course, arguments and valid ones can be presented why this is not necessarily so.........again, what I am asking and what my essential point is is - should we be seen to be and as a first point in evanglizing in order to present and seen to present a sacrificial spirit in the interests of those materially poor and similar matters?........or doesn't it matter and it shouldn't matter and if not, then why not.

Some even find it hypocritical - and justly can one present many reasons why it is not hypocritical at all. But this is how, I am saying, some and perhaps many may be perceiving. Indeed, The Lord does provide amply - one hundredfold - and in very many ways for those who have left all for the sake of The Kingdom and followed His call...but Jesus did point out that The Kingdom is people - and people who are servants.....I have even heard of communities receiving large financial gifts etc. etc. What I am pointing out, I guess is, should such donations be spent on themselves when more than half the world goes to bed hungry, strarving, homeless. Many arguments could be presented why such donations should be spent on themselves.........and again, thus, what I am pointing out is should religious strive to be "seen to be" rather than having good arguments [u][b]if[/b][/u] asked why they are not seen to be.

What should be the priority in a general sense? I realize there may be valid exceptions for some particular reason or another.


Barb
PS.........I am not speaking of the cost of the habit only of course. Although my own personal opinion is the simpler the better - and there are plenty of communities around with quite simple habits. While not speaking of the habit only, it is an public expression of religious life that for sure is a public witness simply because what we wear can to a very large degree 'speak' about identity. Who I am.
Of great interst to me are the Sisters of Mother Teresa of Calcutta. When Mother Teresa first chose her habit it did not appear as a religious habit in any way manner or form, I dont think. It was, in fact, the witness of the lives of Mother Teresa and her Sisters that triggered that her habit be recognized everywhere and as a religious habit and that of jolly good religious. I think my point is there without going further.

Edited November 18, 2009 by BarbaraTherese

[BarbTherese]

[quote] "Poverty of spirit is more about being willing to sleep on the floor than actually sleeping on the floor."[/quote]

Perhaps.............but one may well find that one's poverty of spirit was tested even found wanting if one [u][b]HAD[/b][/u] to sleep on the floor. Sometimes I can think I am something or other and when it is tested, I find that who and what I thought I was, was not so at all.

Somebody else mentioned that to focus on wanting to look poor (re the habit) could be just as bad as the opposite, since it was focusing on oneself. There may be some validity in this........however, my point is that in looking poor (or seen to be) it is a way of witnessing and in the interests of evangelization and not appearing to be contradictory. I am stating "appearing to be" which, of course is not necessarily the actuality. The "seen to be" poor is in the interests (motivation) of witnessing to poverty and seen to be generally a witness to poverty in the interests of evangelization and The Gospel (not vanity over dress and what to wear) - Barb

Edited November 18, 2009 by BarbaraTherese

[BarbTherese]

[quote]I don't really know how much the materials for my habits cost, although I think it would qualify as poor material. I did not get the scratchiest, hottest fabric, either. Mine was made of fabric that was relatively airy, and comfortable to me. Was I not being sacrificial enough? Maybe... I don't know. I really didn't think too much about it... life is pretty short... would God have wanted me to concentrate more on the specifics of how I practiced poverty? I kind of doubt it... I think He would have preferred that I think about Him than about what material my habit was made out of. If I had gotten really itchy material, would that austerity have made me holier? What if I was so uncomfortable I wasn't able to concentrate on Jesus or putting my best effort into my work because all I could think about was how itchy I felt? I don't know... part of me thinks that is a different form of self-centeredness that doesn't help one's relationship with God. But maybe I'm wrong, and that was a serious problem. For all I know, not fully and wholeheartedly practicing poverty that religious life entails, especially as a Franciscan, could have cost me my vocation, if I did actually have one to religious life.[/quote]

Thank you for the above SaintTherese.................First, my purpose in this thread was not only re habit - but the whole issue of "seen to be" in religious life as a priority. Secondly, I do not mean that religious orders should descend to the ridiculous re habit. They need to be functional according to the demands of the particular way of life. I do not mean at all to buy the very cheapest material - though it will itch and be overly hot or not warm enough etc. etc. As St. Albert stated "common sense is the guide of all the virtues".
I am also talking in a quite general sense about religious life............not speaking to (or not meaning to speak to) particular religious already within religious life and thus under a canonical vow of obedience. What is the saying - flower where you are planted, I think it is.

I am also addressing "seen to be" as a witness to The Kingdom which is the baptized called to be servants..........and servants especially of the poor no matter the type of poverty - but it is inclusive of material poverty.

Barb
PS Please excuse the consecutive posts, I am in a different time zone probably than most i.e. Australia.

Edited November 18, 2009 by BarbaraTherese

[GraceUk]

This is an interesting thread. I know people who aren't catholics have a problem with communities vowed to poverty owning land and property worth millions in prime positions. It's a difficult problem.

But day to day life I agree should be simple. But I think food should be adequate as there is no point in people becoming ill because of a bad diet. I had read somewhere that in one community you had to ask permission for a drink of water. I was quite surprised at this. I can perfectly understand people not being allowed to go in the fridge for whatever they wanted to snack between meals or even not allowed coffee when they wanted. But I can't understand the water rule. As if you are thirsty would it not be unhealthy not to drink. Shows how little I know about religious life!

[Lilllabettt]

I think sometimes poverty can be ostentatious. It can be a source of pride to be "seen to be" very poor ... to run around in rags, barefoot and skinny and congratulate oneself (and be congratulated by others) for being sooooo impressively poor.

It also may allow one to think to oneself: "I have a poor habit, I get sneers. She has a rich habit, and people look at her. Wow, how great a martyr I am, especially compared to her."

I think some people find it harder to be radically, materially poor. Other people find it much more humbling to accept whatever God provides, and to risk being judged by others looking from the outside as not being poor enough.

It also depends on the mission. For some congregations, poverty is practiced because it is an aid to evangelization. Other congregations don't have evangelization as their main goal. Maybe their purpose is medical care or prayer or just personal sanctification ... so they're allowed to have whatever possessions deemed helpful to achieving that. And then other communities live with the poor, or have hospitality as their apostolate ... they may be seen to be "living well," but really they live that way for the sake of the poor, or their guests.

Some Sisters drive fancy cars because they have been donated, and in their community's practice of poverty it is against the rule to turn up one's nose at a donation because it is "too rich," because a really poor person would accept with gratitude whatever God provided. Some communities build grand monasteries because they are actually living in God's house, and the house itself is dedicated to God and is designed to give glory to God.

I think we (religious especially) shouldn't compare the "authenticity" of the practice of poverty of religious communities or of one another. Different expressions yes, but authenticity, no. That will almost always end in rash judgment, of ourselves or of the other.

Edited November 18, 2009 by Lilllabettt