Unusual Personal Hygiene Practices

[FiereMargriet]

[quote name='Luigi' post='1857225' date='May 4 2009, 02:05 AM']Are these austerities, or are they traditions? I think an awful lot of people used to live this way back before running water and water heaters were standard, before women felt compelled to shave their legs, (and pardon me) before tampons were marketed.

I just assumed that what are being termed "unusual personal hygiene practices" were the very usual practices back when these orders got up & running. So not everyone supports every tradition in the Church? Aggiornamento has a place, at least in personal hygiene?[/quote]

Luigi, forgive me, I'm assuming that you're saying it's not too austere to allow such practices. Your last sentence had me a little confused which "side" you're on so I'm just writing this, but I'm not "shouting" at you!

I don't want to start an argument, but I don't think it has to do with supporting or not supporting tradition in the Church.

It's true that many (if not most) good, solid, traditional religious communities live in a way that we would consider antiquated in some aspect. Most of us here, including myself, like that idea: getting to wear long, flowing robes to demonstrate our commitment to Christ; living in monasteries with traditional layouts which are almost like castles in the midst of this modern world, not talking at meals but instead listening to a reading from a religious book. And of course there's no reason, when such communities are bastions of holiness, for them to adapt every modern trend or even ANY modern trend.

[b]If you don't want to read about feminine hygiene products, you should probably stop reading here.[/b]

But I see no reason, why something that is hygienically helpful to so many women (tampons), should be outright banned. In fact, the only two reasons I can think of is the idea of mortification/self-denial and the idea--which I think is outdated--that a woman who uses a tampon loses her physical virginity. And yes, I'm sure this idea has stayed with more of the traditional communities. In a way, as a woman, it's nice to know that someone somewhere wants to help you stay pure. But before I even replied to this topic in the first place I Googled "Catholic objections to tampons" and I could find no objections besides those which I think are probably connected to that older argument that it takes a woman's virginity. In fact, on Catholic Answers there is a whole thread about the proper age to start using tampons and most posters voiced their support for these products.

As for the question of self-denial, some people feel called to a more intense life than others. Personally, I feel that with hours of prayer, fasting, limited contact with family and friends and wearing a habit in all weathers one is denying oneself enough without denying oneself hygienic products. I don't feel called to such radical mortification. But some people do, and as long they carry out their practices healthily, that's their choice. And I'm SURE I don't need to get any more graphic about why not wearing a tampon can be unhygienic, uncomfortable, and thus distracting for some women. Yes, some women will be happy to offer it up--probably if you enter the religious life you are already in that mindset. But I just feel it's not necessary or objectively beneficial to [i]deny[/i] these products. So why not offer both pads and tampons and let the Sisters, who have already probably made many difficult life decisions to get to the convent, choose?

[FiereMargriet]

[quote name='TotusTuusMaria' post='1857261' date='May 4 2009, 02:46 AM']They probably are practices handed down, but now they can rightly be considered austerities.

When Mother Teresa first began her congregation she chose some of these things, saying the Missionaries of Charity "would be more [i]austere[/i] then even the Carmelites." She too, even though starting the congregation in the 40s, considered the washing bucket and limited habits austerities.

Traditions... austerities... doesn't matter. I know, for me, it would be a penance.

All for Jesus. [/quote]

Yes, despite my rollicking endorsement of tampons I agree with this I'm not saying I [i]wouldn't[/i] enter a community that had some austerities, as I know self-denial in some aspect is always a part of the religious life. I just don't feel called, at the moment, to extreme mortification (though that could change, depending on what God says to me!), and therefore I don't feel like the philosophy behind not allowing certain products does anything for me. But to each her own! As someone else said, that is why there are so many communities and charisms in the Church!

[Beatus]

I have some news for everybody. On Friday at my weekly Confession, I spoke to Father about this thread and even showed him some of the print outs. I can see more things have been added. (By the way, I spoke to him outside of the Confessional, so I am free to repeat my conversation as well as his.)

First of all, he is a new priest. He told me that he did not have ANY training pertaining to personal womanly things outside of what he had to learn for NFP and it did not include any details about the woman's private issues regarding the details of her monthly cycles. Though he did have to learn about timing, how things work, etc., it was done very discreetly and with a great sense of respect and modesty! Certainly, he did not learn anything about brands or different products or even how to use them! Father told me that in the four years he has been a priest, he has counseled lots of families, married couples and also single people. Personal hygiene has never once reached his ears even in the holy Sacrament of Confession. He is also the Confessor for a cloistered convent that you all know and he said they never talk about these things. Then he told me that there is a big difference between "modesty" and "chastity." He said what offended me was lack of "modesty" and was not an assault on my chastity. After he explained it, I understood. He also told me, very strongly, that one of the items discussed (which someone mentioned after I talked to him) is not right for pure Catholics to use, much less advocate. He said it does indeed invalidate a woman's chastity (and he wondered if my reaction was to that idea?) and ruins her purity. He also said that for many of you who want to be Consecrated Virgins, this totally and completely invalidates the state of virginity necessary for the Rite to be Conferred validily and licitly. Perhaps, he suggested, if some of you have engaged in this practice unknowingly, with bad advice from lax parents, you might be able to receive formal forgiveness and still be eligible but it would need permission from the Bishop. In the case of my instructing a woman to become a Consecrated Virgin, this subject might come up, but if it did (when I become a priest, of course), it would be done with modesty and words that are appropriate, not words that are graphic.

He also said even if a woman does not want to become a Consecrated Virgin, this particular practice could be seen as self abuse which is also a sin.

Also, it is not appropriate to sully the image of Brides of Christ by discussing their smells, their private parts (someone used a very unfitting word!) and how they look without their holy habits on! If some of you are so interested in these things, I believe it would be nice if you were more gentle and modest in your descriptions and also your questions. Perhaps you can IM someone who "knows" and ask them these questions "woman to woman." I appreciate the person who put a bold disclaimer on their post. I read it with an informed conscience now that I was able to talk to Father and was able to prepare myself. If any of us are going to reject modesty or talk about indelicate subjects such as the Holy Brides of Christs' washing habits, we should make all aware.

And Father told me that since I am leaning towards being a monk that does not give retreats or hold an outside "apostolate," chances are very slim that I will be exposed to these kinds of conversations or thoughts. He told me it is better to focus on my spiritual reading, improving myself and praying. I don't have much time left in High School, and I am currently in active discernment, trying to find the right place that help bring me to holiness. I know it is hard work, but I am girding myself. I got very high scores on my tests, so I believe I will make an excellent academic monk.

Please pray for me and remember we need to stay modest! And chaste!

Your friend in the Blessed Virgin Mother Mary in Her Special Month,
Beatus

[homeschoolmom]

I'm closing this thread until the mods can deal with it. We will reopen it, but for now, it's closed.

[color="#FF0000"][b]I have now reopened this thread. I have invited our female Church Scholars to clarify the issue. I wanted to allow the thread to continue.[/b] [/color]

[StColette]

[quote name='Beatus' post='1857763' date='May 4 2009, 05:44 PM']I have some news for everybody. On Friday at my weekly Confession, I spoke to Father about this thread and even showed him some of the print outs. I can see more things have been added. (By the way, I spoke to him outside of the Confessional, so I am free to repeat my conversation as well as his.) First of all, he is a new priest. He told me that he did not have ANY training pertaining to personal womanly things outside of what he had to learn for NFP and it did not include any details about the woman's private issues regarding the details of her monthly cycles.[/quote]

Some priests have more training in some areas than others. For instance, those who specialize in moral theology are more accustomed to such details about the human body whether it be male or female. The priest in residence at my parish is currently finishing his doctorate in Moral Theology. He used to work with Janet Smith and has spoken and written at great length about women’s bodies and the effects certain things, like contraception and abortion, can have upon them.

Btw, reading back through this entire thread I saw no one discussing the private issues regarding the details of her monthly cycle, please don’t exaggerate or accuse phatmassers of things that aren’t true.

A phatmasser merely informed others that some convents do not use tampons. Some girls have not had the opportunity to ask such questions to their possible Order. Some phatmass ladies have been able to ask such questions which means they have knowledge that they can share in that regard to fellow phatmassers. None of the women used foul language that is unbefitting of the dignity of the human person. In fact, their discussion merely consisted of them saying that some convents do not allow them and some do. One of the young ladies expressed concerned because she can only use that type of product possibly because of a medical issue. This is a real concern for her especially if her intended order does not allow them. If it’s a medically necessary use then the convent will allow it rather than put her health at risk. This young lady could have asked any priest this question and received a similar answer. That if it’s medically necessary the convent will allow it. And there should never be any shame for a person to ask their priest any question. And priests, especially those who have been around for a while, have heard everything under the sun. Everything from “I stole candy” to “Father, I have a problem with masturbation.” A priest should have the ability to handle any situation, no matter what has been said, with a calm and collected intellect. They do not judge but guide, no matter what the sin might be.

[quote]Though he did have to learn about timing, how things work, etc., it was done very discreetly and with a great sense of respect and modesty[/quote]

Again, none of the ladies have been immodest in their discussions. If you have been scandalized by the word tampon, menses, or menstruation then I say you have quite a bit of learning and growing to accomplish before you are ready for the priesthood. Many of the issues that come up in moral theology are far more scandalizing than a sanitary product. I would tell you to read Love and Responsibility or Theology of the Body, but I’m afraid it would be far to scandalizing for you at your current maturity level.

[quote]Certainly, he did not learn anything about brands or different products or even how to use them![/quote]

None of the girls discussed how the products are used, so please stop reading things into their posts or saying that they did such things. You are slandering them when you say such things that are not true. And brands and products are not scandalizing; they are necessary for personal hygiene. I can’t think of a single grown man, whether married, single, or a priest that doesn’t know the difference between a tampon and a sanitary pad. Now, had the young ladies been discussing in detail how these products are used, like an instruction sheet, then yes I don’t think that would be appropriate. But to merely mention the product by name out of a concern or question is definitely not unchaste or immodest.

[quote]Father told me that in the four years he has been a priest, he has counseled lots of families, married couples and also single people. Personal hygiene has never once reached his ears even in the holy Sacrament of Confession.[/quote]

Not every priest is going to handle every single case that has ever come up. Like you said he is still a new priest. I know of priests who were priests for several years before they heard a confession about masturbation or adultery in any form.

[quote]He also told me, very strongly, that one of the items discussed (which someone mentioned after I talked to him) is not right for pure Catholics to use, much less advocate. He said it does indeed invalidate a woman's chastity (and he wondered if my reaction was to that idea?) and ruins her purity. He also said that for many of you who want to be Consecrated Virgins, this totally and completely invalidates the state of virginity necessary for the Rite to be Conferred validily and licitly. Perhaps, he suggested, if some of you have engaged in this practice unknowingly, with bad advice from lax parents, you might be able to receive formal forgiveness and still be eligible but it would need permission from the Bishop.[/quote]

I read through the entire thread and the only practice I can imagine that you are referring to is the use of tampons. If you are speaking about tampons, as much as I respect priests, I would have to tell him that he is wrong. The Church has no official position on the use of tampons. And to assert that a tampon does take away virginity is false both from a medical standpoint and from Church teaching. Also if any priest were to tell a young girl she isn't a virgin because she used tampons is making a grave mistake. Such a falsehood could cause a young woman to spiral into depression, among other things. Also, if a priest were to tell a girl that a medical procedure like I describe could destroy her virginity or purity could essentially put her life at risk.

A tampon in no way invalidates the virginity of any woman. Virginity is lost through sexual activity not through the use of a sanitary product or a medical procedure. I can direct you to several doctors as well as websites that will explain in better detail that a tampon does not cause the loss of virginity. You can do a simple Google search if you don’t believe me, but I warn you they will be using scientific terms that you may not be comfortable with.

According to the Church, as I stated early, a virgin is someone that has not participated in sexual intercourse. I will mention that those who have been raped are considered virgins in the eyes of the Church because it was an act against their will.

[b]I’m going to be detailed here so either prepare yourself or skip this part, scientific terms will be used.[/b]

If a woman visit her obgyn for a pap smear, which is medically necessary as it tests for many diseases such as cancer, it is in no way invalidating her virginity nor her purity. The doctor is essentially sticking a swab inside her body to test for illnesses. Though this object is inserted into her, it in no way destroys neither her virginity nor her purity.
Also, there are certain ultrasounds or sonograms that are done by way of inserting something into a woman’s vagina. This ultrasound/sonogram is sometimes necessary to determine ovarian cancer. Again, this procedure does not mean that a woman is no longer a virgin.

[b]Okay the detailed part is over now.[/b]

Also, you keep referring to Consecrated Virgins, I’m guessing you are meaning those who are entering into the religious life, there’s a difference between Consecrated Virgins and religious sisters/nuns. I’m pretty positive the young ladies here are referring to the religious life not to the vocation of Consecrated Virgins. It is not a requirement to be a virgin in order to enter the religious life and take vows. In fact, women or men who are widowed by their spouse may enter into the religious life or priesthood. I doubt any of those widows or widowers are virgins, unless they had a Josephite marriage.

The Following are the list of impediments into the religious life according to Canon Law

Can. 643 §1. The following are admitted to the novitiate invalidly:
1/ one who has not yet completed seventeen years of age;
2/ a spouse, while the marriage continues to exist;
3/ one who is currently bound by a sacred bond to some institute of consecrated life or is incorporated in some society of apostolic life, without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 684;
4/ one who enters the institute induced by force, grave fear, or malice, or the one whom a superior, induced in the same way, has received;
5/ one who has concealed his or her incorporation in some institute of consecrated life or in some society of apostolic life.

Can. 656 For the validity of temporary profession it is required that:
1/ the person who is to make it has completed at least eighteen years of age;
2/ the novitiate has been validly completed;
3/ admission has been given freely by the competent superior with the vote of the council according to the norm of law;
4/ the profession is expressed and made without force, grave fear, or malice;
5/ the profession is received by a legitimate superior personally or through another.

I could continue, but I believe you get the point that according to Canon Law, lack of virginity is not an impediment to enter into the religious life.
[quote]In the case of my instructing a woman to become a Consecrated Virgin, this subject might come up, but if it did (when I become a priest, of course), it would be done with modesty and words that are appropriate, not words that are graphic.[/quote]

Again, no one has used any graphic words. So please stop saying that they used inappropriate words. Again slander. If you believe a person used graphic, inappropriate language please point it out so that a Moderator can see if it is worthy of an edit.

[quote]He also said even if a woman does not want to become a Consecrated Virgin, this particular practice could be seen as self abuse which is also a sin.[/quote]

Again, if you are referring to tampons, they do not go against purity. If they were then the Church would have spoken as such, but She has not. The Holy Mother Church would not casually sit by a let Her children fall into impurity.

[quote]Also, it is not appropriate to sully the image of Brides of Christ by discussing their smells, their private parts (someone used a very unfitting word!) and how they look without their holy habits on![/quote]

Again, I believe you are seeing things in people’s posts that aren’t actually there. No one discussed private parts, at least that I could find or used unfitting words. Someone did mention APC which is an Australian slang for a type of shower, but they weren’t referring to female nor male body parts specifically. And it also was not referring to any of those in the Relgious Life. The only words that I found that might be considered unfitting were menstruation and menses. Both of theses terms are scientifically correct terms. They are also used in NFP discussions as well as discussions about Theology of the Body.

And I also did not find anyone talking about sisters without their habits on and what they look like without them on. Again, I think you’re letting your mind read things into people’s posts that aren’t actually there.

As to the discussion of the way someone smells, I really don’t see how that is inappropriate or how it sullies the image of the Brides of Christ. If someone smells, they smell it has nothing to do with their moral integrity. I actually had a priest ask me if he smelt bad. Lol He had been working out and did not have time to shower before an event. He wanted to make sure he was not going to offend anyone.

[quote]If some of you are so interested in these things, I believe it would be nice if you were more gentle and modest in your descriptions and also your questions. Perhaps you can IM someone who "knows" and ask them these questions "woman to woman." I appreciate the person who put a bold disclaimer on their post. I read it with an informed conscience now that I was able to talk to Father and was able to prepare myself.[/quote]

Phatmass is a very open Catholic forum where discussion of such topics is considered okay and not immodest. We have several priests and moderators here that would correct us if a topic is not appropriate for discussion. But considering that masturbation, NFP, contraception, numerous Theology of the Body topics, etc. are all discussed at length here with maturity then you have no basis for your argument. There is no valid reason why personal hygiene cannot be discussed in the manner in which it has been discussed, which is very tame considering some of the topic I’ve seen.

[quote]If any of us are going to reject modesty or talk about indelicate subjects such as the Holy Brides of Christs' washing habits, we should make all aware.[/quote]

When did discussing washing clothes become immodest? If I say that I’m doing laundry it doesn’t mean that I’m washing all my clothes and have nothing to wear while washing. I believe you are over reacting.

In short I would say that you need to devote some time to learning about the human body, both male and female. A good source to start with would be Theology of the Body. The human body,and it's functions, are beautiful creations by God. He does not create anything that is ugly or disgusting. You may not be able to see the beauty in such body functions but that does not mean that they are disgusting and that we should not discuss them. Part of growing in holiness is to grow in appreciation for what God has bestowed upon us. The gift of the human body by the Lord is a very treasured thing and should be respected and loved for what it is, a creation by God.

[Mary-Kathryn]

I am not sure what a "church scholar" on phatmass is ( I do not pretend to be a scholar thats for sure!) so as a result my reply here may be wiped away if I am in error in replying.

However...

I can speak from many sides and I feel it is very important I do so. It is because of the openness of a priest--of his willingness to listen and to be compassionate- that I do as well as I do today. I come from a background where I was terribly abused and if he had cringed away and said "Stop!" or said I was being immodest then I would not have had the beauty of what I have been given:


The healing that came within the Sacraments of The Church.

Trust me when I say my background is terribly ugly, it is profane and can be said not fit for mixed company. But as a priest he has heard it all and it was never unfit for his ears nor for the confessional. And as this priest pointed out time and again I am God's child.

By the way--I am a convert to The Church.

Edited May 5, 2009 by Mary-Kathryn

[CatherineM]

Ditto to everything you said Jennie, but I'd like to pile on a bit because this post really brought out my Irish temper.

Beatus-Individuals who are interested in entering a religious order, especially young people with limited life experiences away from home, need to be able to ask questions. Before my son went away to the US Navy for boot camp, he asked his recruiters many of the same kind of questions that the young women are discussing here. Fear of the unknown is a very powerful thing, and the way we humans lessen this fear is with information. No one on this thread has been disrespectful in any way to my thinking except for you.

As to what your priest told you, since I was not privy to how you presented the information to him, and what he actually told you, I am going to assume that there has been some sort of miscommunication involved. A woman’s virginity is about as personal as anything we humans have, and frankly it isn’t any of your business. I’m not sure if you have some kind of unhealthy sexual issues that compelled you to discuss this in the confessional, but the information you have posted is horribly incorrect.

The church teaches that a woman’s virginity is one of the spirit, and not one of the body. Some women aren’t even born with a hymen. Some have lost it long before their first sexual intercourse due to accidents or medical procedures. Even a woman who has been raped is still deemed to be a virgin because she did not willingly engage in the sex. The idea that tampon use causes you to lose your virginity is absurd. If your priest really said such an outrageous thing, his education has obviously been neglected in this area. In John Paul II’s Theology of the Body, he constantly refers to virginity as Voluntary Continence for the sake of the kingdom. This is how John Paul defined Purity:
[quote]“Purity in the moral sense
3. In relation to the aforesaid juridico-religious tradition of the old covenant, an erroneous way of understanding moral purity developed.(1) It was often taken in the exclusively exterior and material sense. In any case, an explicit tendency to this interpretation spread. Christ opposed it radically. Nothing from outside makes one filthy, no "material" dirt makes one impure in the moral, that is, interior sense. No ablution, not even of a ritual nature, is capable in itself of producing moral purity. This has its exclusive source within man. It comes from the heart.
Probably the respective prescriptions in the Old Testament (for example, those found in Leviticus 15:16-24; 18:lff., or 12:1-5) served, in addition to hygienic purposes, to attribute a certain dimension of interiority to what is corporeal and sexual in the human person. In any case, Christ took good care not to connect purity in the moral (ethical) sense with physiology and its organic processes. In the light of the words of Matthew 15:18-20, quoted above, none of the aspects of sexual "dirtiness," in the strictly bodily, biophysiological sense, falls by itself into the definition of purity or impurity in the moral (ethical) sense.
Taken from:
L'Osservatore Romano
Weekly Edition in English
15 December 1980, page 19[/quote]

I guess he didn’t have any fears about speaking about such things publicly. He spoke of all the varieties of human sexual existence, not in shame, but in confidence, and clarity, so that we would all understand that sex is a wonderful gift our God has given us, and like all important gifts, we should treat it with reverence. Those who return this gift to the Lord as they received it, give the ultimate gift. Not all of us are capable of making that life time vow of chastity, but those who do, are an example to all of us how special a gift our sexuality is.

There are many women who enter religious orders who are no longer virgins, some are even mothers. They take a vow of chastity from the time they take their vows. As far as consecrated virgins are concerned, we consecrated one a year or so ago here. She said she preferred to be called Consecrated Single to focus on the vocation rather than on sex. Here is the definition of who can become a Consecrated Virgin from the web site for the Consecrated Virgins Association:
[quote]“Who can be consecrated?
A woman living in the world who has never married or lived in open violation of chastity, and who by age, prudence, and good character is deemed suitable for dedicating herself to a life of chastity in the service of the Church and of her neighbor may petition her bishop to receive the Consecration. She must be admitted to this Consecration by her local Bishop; it is he who determines the conditions under which the candidate is to undertake a life of perpetual virginity lived in the world. Usually, a woman who aspires to the Consecration works with a spiritual director and [b]has lived a private promise of perpetual virginity for some years before seeking the Consecration of a Virgin.[/b]
It is understood that a laywoman aspiring to the Consecration of a Virgin is able to support herself by work or pension or independent means and has provided financially for her medical care.
A woman aspiring to the Consecration should be practicing her faith. She accepts the teaching of the Church and Sacred Scripture, with a readiness and capacity for personal growth. She should be able to give herself totally to God and the Church.”[/quote] Emphasis mine.

I didn’t see tampons mentioned once. By the way, a priest is bound to secrecy of the confessional, not the penitent. You are allowed to discuss anything you or your confessor talks about. I'm sure that is just an omission in your theological education that can be eventually filled in. I am glad that you are considering the priesthood because we need an increase in vocations. I sincerely hope that you will gain some maturity and education in the real world before that time to gain the charity that you are lacking. I sincerely recommend that you read John Paul's "Theology of the Body," and Fr. Ron Rolheiser's "The Holy Longing." Both books explain our sexuality in a way that all Catholics should understand. God Bless.

[johnnydigit]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1852969' date='Apr 30 2009, 12:33 AM']This topic has reminded me of my Uncle Jimmy. He entered a monastery in 1928. They asked him to leave because he wouldn't take showers.[/quote]

as odd as this seems to me, i just heard something like this the other day from a former novice - some people don't seem to want to bathe, but must do so under holy obedience. bathing is a penance for them, and them not bathing is a penance for the rest of us!

[IcePrincessKRS]

[quote name='Mary-Kathryn' post='1858562' date='May 5 2009, 02:53 PM']I am not sure what a "church scholar" on phatmass is ( I do not pretend to be a scholar thats for sure!) so as a result my reply here may be wiped away if I am in error in replying.[/quote]

Church Scholars on phatmass are those who have received their degrees in Theology. We have a small handful of them and value their knowledge and ability to answer the tough questions that some of us "regular" folks might have difficulty with. They, and clergy, are the only ones allowed to answer questions in the Q&A phorum.

[VeniteAdoremus]

[quote name='johnnydigit' post='1858568' date='May 5 2009, 08:57 PM'] as odd as this seems to me, i just heard something like this the other day from a former novice - some people don't seem to want to bathe, but must do so under holy obedience. bathing is a penance for them, and them not bathing is a penance for the rest of us![/quote]


I know several monasteries where retreatants are asked to refrain from using perfumes etc. so you won't disturb the others in chapel. But showering is still appreciated

There are (cloistered) Houses where they only bathe once a month (I've heard of Austrian male Trappists and and Argentinian female Carmelites) unless there are severe reasons not to - in the mean time they make do with sponge baths. I can imagine that would be off-putting to some and no problem to others - but definitely something you like to know in advance

[Mary-Kathryn]

[quote name='IcePrincessKRS' post='1858574' date='May 5 2009, 03:12 PM']Church Scholars on phatmass are those who have received their degrees in Theology. We have a small handful of them and value their knowledge and ability to answer the tough questions that some of us "regular" folks might have difficulty with. They, and clergy, are the only ones allowed to answer questions in the Q&A phorum. [/quote]

Thanks for the help and the explanation! Then the mods will want to delete my post because I don't have a degree in theology

[FiereMargriet]

I'm sorry I got a little too passionate about this post, but it is important to me for the reasons mentioned. I'm glad the female Church Scholars have given us so many things to think about. I must say I really love this website, and how much we all inform each other

[Beatus]

In my defense, I SHOWED my priest the print outs from this thread. I will show him the one from the "Church Scholar."

I did not refer to the washing of holy habits, but the habits (as in the practice) of washing (as in bathing). I still do not find it appropriate to discuss if a nun washes only certain parts once or twice a month or what have you.

Someone did mention their monthly cycle as she announced that during her uppcoming retreat/live in she would be in the midst of it. I believe that is private information.

I am not an idiot. If a doctor does something for medical reasons, that does not invalidate one's purity (this speaks for men too) but my priest advised me that some people use certain things-products as a means of self abuse. I was just reporting.

As for my referral to Consecrated Virginity, that is what first brought to me to this website. I don't know how to find the thread, but it was very clearly said that one has to be a physical VIRGIN in order to receive the Sacramental. [b]That was on this website! [/b]Though I am not an adult and clearly thought of as being immature among other things, this is a subject I have thoroughly researched. [url="http://doihaveavocation.com/blog/archives/category/consecrated-virgins"]http://doihaveavocation.com/blog/archives/...ecrated-virgins[/url] is written by Therese Ivers a CANON LAWYER and she has a lot of information regarding this. I understand the difference between Consecrated Virgins living in the world and women who enter religious life and then receive the Rite. Not all communities Confer the Rite, though many believe that is the case.

Lastly, I do not believe that CROTCH is an appropriate or modest word (especially in referring to a nun) and it was used here. I suppose we just disagree on that word.

And again, I have news for everybody: I ended my post by repeating my priest's advice to me to continue learning, studying, spiritual reading and working on myself. I will continue to do that while you name call, accuse me of SLANDER (which I did not do!) and put me down. I will pray for you.

Beatus

[IcePrincessKRS]

[quote name='Mary-Kathryn' post='1858604' date='May 5 2009, 04:08 PM']Thanks for the help and the explanation! Then the mods will want to delete my post because I don't have a degree in theology [/quote]

Your post is fine.

[VeniteAdoremus]

Beatus, I think it's important to keep the goal of this thread in mind. Of course, it would be inappropriate to discuss how often a sister washes herself, and none of our business. But in this case we are looking at what [i]our own future[/i] might hold in this aspect, and how this might differ from community to community (and why).

We're not saying things like "Oh, Sr. XYZ only washes herself twice a month". We're noting that there are communities that have rules about this (and communities that don't, within reason). This is something you [i]don't[/i] want to be finding out upon entrance.

This is why I think this thread is not inappropriate for those who are wondering about those things.

You were, by the way, not called any names. The idea of slander came because in your post you referred to things that are indeed inappropriate and [i]were not discussed in this thread[/i], e.g. the use of female hygienic products. Your mentioning them in this context implied that you told your priest girls here were discussing this, which would be untrue (although personally I'm not sure about whether it's slander, I can see how it is taken that way). You were well-meaning, but in going overboard you are not assisting us - merely putting people in the defensive, which never makes for a good discussion.