Jump to content

Religious Life & Temperaments


Recommended Posts

TeresaBenedicta

[quote name='organwerke' date='06 April 2010 - 03:45 PM' timestamp='1270579552' post='2087777']
Well, for example, among the Qualifications required to become a Missionary of Charity I read that candidates must be of a cheerful disposition....has it anything to do with it? :think: :)
[/quote]

That's something I've wondered... it does seem that certain temperaments seem to exude joy and "cheerfulness" more so than others, but I don't think that necessarily means that the other temperaments can't be joyful or cheerful. I know that I've struggled a lot with trying to "show" outwardly my inner joy-- it would be so disheartening for me to hear from others that they thought I was sour or always ill disposed, when in reality, I was quite joyful. I just never expressed that joy with lots of smiles and hugs.

Having a friend who is very much outwardly joyful (and inwardly as well!) has helped me learn how to 'express' my joy a little bit better. While I am still more of a introverted person, I have made it a goal to consciously smile at those whom I walk past or to stop and chat with acquaintances. Those aren't things that come naturally to me, nor are they what I would naturally think to be natural outflows of a joyful person, but I've found that they really do have an effect on other people.

It's a balance that must be found, I think. But it's been something I've considered when I think about the religious community that I am attracted to... they are very joyful, and known by many for it. It's part of what attracts me to them. But, I'm not necessarily an outwardly joyful person. Still, I think that it's an area in which I have room to grow (to an extent, of course).

(Edited for typos)

Edited by TeresaBenedicta
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • AccountDeleted

    10

  • vee

    8

  • Indwelling Trinity

    7

  • IgnatiusofLoyola

    6

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I don't have a lot of time to respond, but nunsense, I think you're getting the wrong idea that people are trying to push you to like temperaments, and I don't think anyone is. Personally I don't care

[quote name='Innocent' date='06 April 2010 - 06:16 PM' timestamp='1270534597' post='2087546'] The temperaments were discussed here on the Phorum lately. Here are the links to the threads: [url="ht

I was reading the posts where people mentioned they are an INFP, INFJ, ASPCA, or CSI: Miami and I realized the most important personality/ temperament acronym. The one we all should be working for,

[quote name='cmariadiaz' date='06 April 2010 - 11:55 AM' timestamp='1270572906' post='2087705']

As far as whether the temperaments have a place ... I personally think that there are times where it can be of value, but shouldn't be the "deciding factor."

Having said this -- I think we could all agree to disagree without getting offended?
[/quote]

Here here! Personally, I think that things like these can be helpful, at least to a certain level, but in the end they can often be subjective. It is possible to learn from something, but to necessarily label oneself by that name. Ironically though, I still find, at the moment at least, that for years now I've consistently been an ISFJ with a strong I and strong J, but the two traits in the middle can change at times. I seriously do think that this is a wonderful description of my temperament. I took the test earlier and got a different result- INTJ (yet still a strong I and J.) I find that ananlyzing the temperaments of people just might be the most subjective thing in the world though. Certainly it can change over time, but some years at least the difference doesn't seem to be as strong.

I found it amusing to see certain celebrities that one has traits in common with. Sometimes it can be quite entertaining. :lol_roll: And for anyone curious about how Our Lady would be termed as...http://typelogic.com/infp.html

St. Peter http://typelogic.com/estj.html St. Mark has the same personality type as Steve Erwin. :lol_pound: http://typelogic.com/esfp.html

Our Lord apparentally is too much of a wild card for MB.

Link to post
Share on other sites
laetitia crucis

[quote name='tinytherese' date='06 April 2010 - 04:52 PM' timestamp='1270583520' post='2087817']
Here here! Personally, I think that things like these can be helpful, at least to a certain level, but in the end they can often be subjective. It is possible to learn from something, but to necessarily label oneself by that name. Ironically though, I still find, at the moment at least, that for years now I've consistently been an ISFJ with a strong I and strong J, but the two traits in the middle can change at times. I seriously do think that this is a wonderful description of my temperament. I took the test earlier and got a different result- INTJ (yet still a strong I and J.) I find that ananlyzing the temperaments of people just might be the most subjective thing in the world though. Certainly it can change over time, but some years at least the difference doesn't seem to be as strong.

I found it amusing to see certain celebrities that one has traits in common with. Sometimes it can be quite entertaining. :lol_roll: And for anyone curious about how Our Lady would be termed as...http://typelogic.com/infp.html

St. Peter http://typelogic.com/estj.html St. Mark has the same personality type as Steve Erwin. :lol_pound: http://typelogic.com/esfp.html

Our Lord apparentally is too much of a wild card for MB.
[/quote]

Those are really neat links, TT! I am an INFP. I found it quite amusing to see so many of my favorite people (fictional -- well, except for Wesley Crusher :P Hah! -- and non-fictional) are supposedly the same! :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Indwelling Trinity

[quote name='IgnatiusofLoyola' date='06 April 2010 - 01:08 PM' timestamp='1270570089' post='2087688']
LOL at "Sister Smoke Ring." [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/rotfl.gif[/img]

In our imaginary order, smoking isn't allowed (we have to give up SOMETHING), but we need a resident saint. So, when people ask about the halo over your head, we don't want to brag or seem more holy than others, so we will just say, "Oh, Sister Mary Smoke Ring has been hiding behind the statue of Mary in the grotto smoking stogies again."

I like the name "Sister Smoke Ring" almost as much as I like "Sister Rosary Bede" (which is my favorite name so far.)
[/quote]


Laughing... you guys are so baaaad!!!!:P

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='TeresaBenedicta' date='06 April 2010 - 09:42 PM' timestamp='1270582944' post='2087812']
That's something I've wondered... it does seem that certain temperaments seem to exude joy and "cheerfulness" more so than others, but I don't think that necessarily means that the other temperaments can't be joyful or cheerful. I know that I've struggled a lot with trying to "show" outwardly my inner joy-- it would be so disheartening for me to hear from others that they thought I was sour or always ill disposed, when in reality, I was quite joyful. I just never expressed that joy with lots of smiles and hugs.

Having a friend who is very much outwardly joyful (and inwardly as well!) has helped me learn how to 'express' my joy a little bit better. While I am still more of a introverted person, I have made it a goal to consciously smile at those whom I walk past or to stop and chat with acquaintances. Those aren't things that come naturally to me, nor are they what I would naturally think to be natural outflows of a joyful person, but I've found that they really do have an effect on other people.

It's a balance that must be found, I think. But it's been something I've considered when I think about the religious community that I am attracted to... they are very joyful, and known by many for it. It's part of what attracts me to them. But, I'm not necessarily an outwardly joyful person. Still, I think that it's an area in which I have room to grow (to an extent, of course).

(Edited for typos)
[/quote]


Thank you for your beautiful answer!!!
I think that we have the same temperament....!!! :)
And especially this:
[quote] Those aren't things that come naturally to me, nor are they what I would naturally think to be natural outflows of a joyful person, but [b]I've found that they really do have an effect on other people.[/b] [/quote]
is really true!

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Indwelling Trinity' date='06 April 2010 - 10:54 PM' timestamp='1270558450' post='2087611']
Thanks for the Laugh! :smokey:
[/quote]

you`re welcome :twothumbsup:


[quote]IgnatiusofLoyola, on 06 April 2010 - 01:08 PM, said:

Oh, Sister Mary Smoke Ring has been hiding behind the statue of Mary in the grotto smoking stogies again."[/quote]

This reminds me of the movie The Trouble with Angels which I recommend if you havent seen it. Its on youtube heres part one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XkKtPmZ348

Edited by vee8
Link to post
Share on other sites
laetitia crucis

[quote name='vee8' date='06 April 2010 - 06:52 PM' timestamp='1270590741' post='2087928']

This reminds me of the movie The Trouble with Angels which I recommend if you havent seen it. Its on youtube heres part one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XkKtPmZ348
[/quote]

What a scathingly [i]brilliant[/i] idea!

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='zunshynn' date='07 April 2010 - 02:55 AM' timestamp='1270565759' post='2087650']
I don't have a lot of time to respond, but nunsense, I think you're getting the wrong idea that people are trying to push you to like temperaments, and I don't think anyone is. Personally I don't care if you care about temperaments or if anyone else does... but I do find it somewhat offensive that you continue to imply that someone is less Catholic if they find value in it, when it is something that has played a role in the Church for centuries. No one said it should be everything, or that religious communities should use it to decided if someone has a vocation.
[/quote]

zunshynn

This particular topic seems to have hit a nerve with you, or perhaps you simply don't like my posts, I don't know. But either way, I did find your post offensive to me personally because it implied that I had no right to my opinion if it was different from everyone else's and it attributed to me ideas and attitudes that I don't hold. Please quote to me a statement where I say that anyone who uses them are 'less than Catholic'. And as for the astrology comparison, I find all labeling odious, whether it is as new age as astrology or as 'scientific' as psychological assessments. I have seen too many people use a 'label' as an excuse for their behavior or actions.

I realize that I am in the minority here, and I stated that many times. I realize that the Church uses these things for assessment, and I stated that. I realize that it is only my opinion and that no one else has to agree and I stated that. I don't know how I could have been more fair in what I said.

Nowhere in my posts do I state that you should care about what I think so your comment is very harsh indeed. The OP said this
[quote] Take this topic however you please-- I'm just curious about everyone's thinking on the subject. Here are a couple of interesting sites I came across when I was looking stuff up:
[/quote]

I thought that meant that my opinion was just as valid as yours, despite the fact that no one may agree with me! I also tried to include little smiley faces to show that it was only my opinion.

What I am trying to understand from your post is exactly what you are saying to me. Are you saying that I have no right to my opinion, or that I should not post it here? Really? Are you saying that I can't compare these things with other labeling systems such as astrology? Really? I could go into a great intellectual debate about these kinds of comparisons but I thought that this was not the Debate Table but the Vocation Station, where we discussed things about vocations. I tried to relate my opinions back to vocations, only to be told that it wasn't about how these were used for that purpose, but how they were used by individuals to learn about themselves and avoid sin. So then I tried to talk about it from that point of view and said that if some people found this useful, that is good for them (I think I said that I concede the point). But from what you write, I hear that I am not even allowed to disagree with this point either?

Honestly, if I have to 'toe the party line' here and agree with what everyone else thinks, then I don't know how I can continue to post. If we are talking personality types, I don't need a test to tell myself that I am a compulsively self-disclosing person who lays everything out on the line, heart and soul, and is as honest as I can be. I am forthright, opinionated and passionate. But I am also open and flexible and willing to listen to well reasoned out arguments pro and con. And I have been known to change my mind and do a complete about face. Sometimes I play the devil's advocate for a topic, and sometimes I just 'say it like it is'. If I disagree with someone, then at least they know where they stand with me because there is no hypocrisy, no deceit and no hidden agendas. If I meant that that people who use psychological assessments weren't Catholic, then I would have written that, but since I didn't write that, I didn't mean that!

I am sorry if my personality type offends you, but I certainly don't think that I deserve to be shut down the way you did in your post zunshynn, and although you tried to correct it later, the fact is that it strikes me as being a bit more personal than deserved, since all of us here are just stating our own opinions, and none of us are experts.

Some of us may have more or different experiences in this area, which may have affected how we perceive this topic (or any other). Don't forget I am 57 years old and have lived more than five different careers during that time in five different countries so I might not always see things the same way that others do. And yes, I do get passionate, but so do many others here and I thought up til now that we had all done well to speak our minds with charity and acceptance of each other's differences.

For the record, no, I do not like personality testing. I can tell a lot more about a someone's personality in the way they treat another person, especially when they disagree with them. It just seems to me that your attack was very personal and not directed at the topic at hand but at me. I am happy for anyone to disagree with me but I certainly don't appreciate a personal attack, especially in an environment where I should be able to expect better. It is very disappointing.

Edited by nunsense
Link to post
Share on other sites
IgnatiusofLoyola

[quote name='laetitia crucis' date='06 April 2010 - 04:55 PM' timestamp='1270590918' post='2087931']
What a scathingly [i]brilliant[/i] idea!
[/quote]

I love that movie (The Trouble with Angels), but haven't seen it in ages. Thanks for letting me know it is on YouTube.

But, I liked the book even better. (Typical of me--I almost always prefer the book to those "new-fangled moving pictures." LOL )

Edited by IgnatiusofLoyola
Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='organwerke' date='07 April 2010 - 01:15 AM' timestamp='1270579552' post='2087777']
Well, for example, among the Qualifications required to become a Missionary of Charity I read that candidates must be of a cheerful disposition....
[/quote]

Do you know of any orders that would think one a prospective candidate if he had the disposition of Puddleglum? :lol:

[quote name='IgnatiusofLoyola' date='07 April 2010 - 07:26 AM' timestamp='1270601790' post='2088049']
But, I liked the book even better. (Typical of me--I almost always prefer the book to those "new-fangled moving pictures." LOL )
[/quote]

Amen!

Edited by Innocent
Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='nunsense' date='06 April 2010 - 05:51 PM' timestamp='1270552904' post='2087600']
St Teresa wasn't talking about any personality profiling in her book, and in fact the use of the word melancholy in her day is much different than in ours.
[/quote]

Oh, is she then referring to the sin of Acedia when she says "melancholy?"

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='nunsense' date='06 April 2010 - 04:34 PM' timestamp='1270593265' post='2087959']
zunshynn

This particular topic seems to have hit a nerve with you, or perhaps you simply don't like my posts, I don't know. But either way, I did find your post offensive to me personally because it implied that I had no right to my opinion if it was different from everyone else's and it attributed to me ideas and attitudes that I don't hold. Please quote to me a statement where I say that anyone who uses them are 'less than Catholic'. And as for the astrology comparison, I find all labeling odious, whether it is as new age as astrology or as 'scientific' as psychological assessments. I have seen too many people use a 'label' as an excuse for their behavior or actions.

I realize that I am in the minority here, and I stated that many times. I realize that the Church uses these things for assessment, and I stated that. I realize that it is only my opinion and that no one else has to agree and I stated that. I don't know how I could have been more fair in what I said.

Nowhere in my posts do I state that you should care about what I think so your comment is very harsh indeed. The OP said this


I thought that meant that my opinion was just as valid as yours, despite the fact that no one may agree with me! I also tried to include little smiley faces to show that it was only my opinion.

What I am trying to understand from your post is exactly what you are saying to me. Are you saying that I have no right to my opinion, or that I should not post it here? Really? Are you saying that I can't compare these things with other labeling systems such as astrology? Really? I could go into a great intellectual debate about these kinds of comparisons but I thought that this was not the Debate Table but the Vocation Station, where we discussed things about vocations. I tried to relate my opinions back to vocations, only to be told that it wasn't about how these were used for that purpose, but how they were used by individuals to learn about themselves and avoid sin. So then I tried to talk about it from that point of view and said that if some people found this useful, that is good for them (I think I said that I concede the point). But from what you write, I hear that I am not even allowed to disagree with this point either?

Honestly, if I have to 'toe the party line' here and agree with what everyone else thinks, then I don't know how I can continue to post. If we are talking personality types, I don't need a test to tell myself that I am a compulsively self-disclosing person who lays everything out on the line, heart and soul, and is as honest as I can be. I am forthright, opinionated and passionate. But I am also open and flexible and willing to listen to well reasoned out arguments pro and con. And I have been known to change my mind and do a complete about face. Sometimes I play the devil's advocate for a topic, and sometimes I just 'say it like it is'. If I disagree with someone, then at least they know where they stand with me because there is no hypocrisy, no deceit and no hidden agendas. If I meant that that people who use psychological assessments weren't Catholic, then I would have written that, but since I didn't write that, I didn't mean that!

I am sorry if my personality type offends you, but I certainly don't think that I deserve to be shut down the way you did in your post zunshynn, and although you tried to correct it later, the fact is that it strikes me as being a bit more personal than deserved, since all of us here are just stating our own opinions, and none of us are experts.

Some of us may have more or different experiences in this area, which may have affected how we perceive this topic (or any other). Don't forget I am 57 years old and have lived more than five different careers during that time in five different countries so I might not always see things the same way that others do. And yes, I do get passionate, but so do many others here and I thought up til now that we had all done well to speak our minds with charity and acceptance of each other's differences.

For the record, no, I do not like personality testing. I can tell a lot more about a someone's personality in the way they treat another person, especially when they disagree with them. It just seems to me that your attack was very personal and not directed at the topic at hand but at me. I am happy for anyone to disagree with me but I certainly don't appreciate a personal attack, especially in an environment where I should be able to expect better. It is very disappointing.
[/quote]

I've reread my posts and I'm not sure why you took any of them as a personal attack, as I never made any comments about your person at all, but rather about things you said. We've been on friendly terms as far as I was aware for the past several months, and no your "personality type" does not offend me... so no, it was nothing personal. I also said it didn't bother me if you, or anyone else, disagreed. I think you've made this much more personal than I would have liked to make it.

I would have said the same thing to anyone that compared temperaments to horoscopes... I honestly think that's an absurd comparison to make and I would have called anyone out on it. You're certainly entitled to express it, but I don't see why my arguing with that point makes it a personal attack and doesn't pertain to the topic at hand. To me, comparing temperaments to astrology would be like comparing the apparitions at Lourdes to the condemned "apparitions" of Bayside. Obviously there is nothing wrong with having no interest in Lourdes. But I definitely would hope most people would not compare them to one the Church has condemned, and personally, I felt compelled to say something just as I would have in that situation. It was not a personal attack and I didn't mean for you to take it as such.

[quote name='nunsense' date='10 March 2010 - 02:32 PM' timestamp='1268253151' post='2070478']
I am none of those. I am 100% Catholic.
[/quote]

[quote name='nunsense' date='06 April 2010 - 01:14 AM' timestamp='1270538059' post='2087559']
I said that I was none of the four types, I was 100% Catholic.[/quote]


I don't really know how one could take a statement that you are 100% Catholic because you do not have a temperament as not implying that someone is less than 100% Catholic if they do regard temperaments as legitimate things that everyone has, but I apologize if I was reading to much into that.




With that said, I am not discerning, am 21 and have much less life experience than others... so I doubt I have that much to contribute to the vocation station. Unfortunately, I just can't seem to stay on PM without getting aggravated by things on the Vocation Station. I'm not finding it to be beneficial to me anymore, and so what little I might be able to contribute probably doesn't balance out... and I a have a distinct feeling that I'm adding to the problem, which I don't want. So I think I'll be bowing out. I feel like this is a silly "last straw" to leave on, but it's been coming more or less for awhile and is certainly not only because of this, or because of any one person here.

I will definitely keep you all in my prayers though, and I hope you will keep me in yours.

Pax et bonum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



It costs about $850 a year for Phatmass.com to survive–and we barely make it. If you’d like to help keep the Phorum alive, please consider a monthly gift.



×
×
  • Create New...