The Daughters of Charity’s 1964 updated habit:
From this
A Nun Changes Her Habit
By Sister Maura Eichner, SSND Catholic Digest, December, 1963
Love is my meaning In the old one and In the new one
Tomorrow I will put on the new Religious habit our Community as adopted. Tonight I stand for a minute to impress each familiar detail of the old habit on my mind before I make the change.
I know that once I begin to remove the pins that hold the black veil in the double - starched frame of muslin, I will never put it on again. I let my fingers grip the large beads of the rosary that hangs from by cincture, which I put on for so many mornings with the day’s first prayer still in my mouth: “I will arise and put on Jesus Christ the Crucified whom my soul loves and in whom my heart rejoices.” I will not wear this rosary again. I begin. Take off the veil; take off the stiff muslin wimple so well starched that it holds its rectangular frame for days of strenuous work. Take off the cincture. Lift the rosary from its hook. Take off the heavy black habit. I will never put it on again. I am not being sentimental; this is a moment of real pain. My throat constricts on every unspoken farewell. My eyes burn from tears I have not wept. This was the Religious habit that someone helped me put on as a sign that I would “put on Jesus Christ.” This was the habit that brought an alien weight to shoulders accustomed to shantung, crepe, and cotton pastels. This was the habit on which I dripped wax from the burning candle they put into my hands at the altar, “Let your light shine...”This was the habit in which I vowed “obedience, poverty, chastity-forever: This was the habit in which I have known penance, exquisite joy, and a grief as demanding as silence.
This was the habit that represented my Community to people all ove r the world who had been taught by my Sisters. It meant that two of us could stand, waiting for a bus on Piazza Venezia in Rome, and be greeted by the words, “You Sisters ever teach in Green Bay, Wisconsin?” We said No, we didn’t teach there but our Sisters do. And the man said, “I know. I was a poor kid then. They were kind to me. Nice to see you.” This habit meant “our” Community, not to us alone, but to others. It was not really important. What you wear is not what matters. What you are does matter, I know it. But still...
I will put on a new, modified habit in response to John XXIII’s warm and gentle admonition to “open the windows” and Pius XII’s appeal to “conform to modern demands.”
My sisters teach in the slums of New York City, struggle through sand and snowstorms in the Dakotas, move through the gracious tea ceremony in Japan, live in lonely mountain huts in Brazil, teach in the barrios of Argentina, crouch on the floor…
18 comments:
That was sad.
Big mistake - another Vatican Disaster II “success” story
I added to the post, the 1963 updated habit which was a minor veil change. But from the SSND archives, this discussion went back to 1952!
https://www.sturdyroots.org/file/general-chapters/religious-dress-discussion-notes-1952.pdf
Now the old dears that are left in this once great Religious Order wear no habit!
from the link "the Sisters want a change in the sense that
they be seen as neat and clean, for this plays a great part today in vocations. At the
same time, as much as possible we should keep the distinctive quality of our habit."
I always said some simplification was warranted, some of the head pieces were ridiculousness. However look where we are now, polyester from the bin Or worse stretch pants or sweats and no habit or uniform at all, and they are gone! Little old ladies from the old folks home. It is a thrill to see a nun or sister in a habit!
Father McDonald, I recall that at the beginning of this year, you had initiated the following thread:
THE CATASTROPHE OF WOMEN’S RELIGIOUS ORDERS SINCE 1965 AND THEIR SO-CALLED SPRINGTIME OF RENEWAL
I had noted then:
Pope Venerable Pius XII had called upon women's religious orders to enter into modern times.
That included radical changes to religious garb.
Here is a September 11, 1958 A.D. article from The Catholic Transcript (Archdiocese of Hartford) in regard to the above:
https://thecatholicnewsarchive.org/?a=d&d=CTR19580911-01.2.18&e=-------en-20--1--txt-txIN--------
CHANGES IN GARB OF WOMEN'S RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS TAKING PLACE GRADUALLY
By FATHER JAMES I. TUCEK
Vatican City — (NC) — Although the modification of the habits worn by religious women as recommended by Pope Pius XII is proceeding slowly, officials of the Congregation of Religious say that there is a definite movement in many orders and societies' to comply with the Pope's wishes.
Father Agostino Pugiiese of that congregation declined to say how many or which groups had already effected changes, but he did reveal that “many religious orders of women have requested and obtained permission to effect a partial adaptation of their original habit.”
He repeated what the Holy Father said recently...that the religious garb is an external sign of a way of life, but it is not essential to it.
But, with permission, it can be radically simplified, even to the extent, in some cases, of making religious hardly distinguishable from laypersons."
Pax.
Mark Thomas
MT, today in my Diocese of Savannah, Religious sisters are almost extinct. And the Vatican has clamped down on cloistered Carmelite nuns worldwide and our Carmel in Savannah which eventually will be closed. They've been in Savannah since the mid 1950's.
While this is guesstimate, well into the late 1960's our Diocese had about 300 sisters, all either in Catholic education or three hospitals in our diocese. Today, I would say there are fewer than 30.
I added the Daughters of Charity change of habit in 1964. It is a commonsense change but still a habit or uniform Today we have about 6 Daughters of Charity in Macon. They generally wear a white blouse with a dark blue skirt. A very simple veil is optional but the younger sisters are wearing it again, not so much the older ones.
Saint Elizabeth Ann Seton's order at its founding wore the mourning closes of widows with a very simple bonnet.
I think what was lost beginning with Pope Pius XII in 1952 is the fact that the habit is a sacramental pointing to Christ for both the religious and the laity. Those great women religious orders of the past, like the SSND, Mercy, St. Joseph sisters, all were to an extreme in rejecting everything about pre-Vatican II religious life and now lay women have rejected them too by not joining. They will soon be extinct.
I do think it is good to distinguish between "sisters" who are not monastic and "nuns" who are many of whom are cloistered. It makes sense for monastic nuns to wear a true habit.
For sisters who are out in the world, a monastic habit needs adaptation, but it should remain a strict religious uniform even if the veil is rejected.
Priests, religious or secular, in the USA prior to Vatican II were not allowed to wear their habits or cassocks outside the confines of their church property. They had to wear the black suit with a Roman Collar. Thus there was no problem in changing from the habit or cassock to the modern version of it with suit and collar. Religious women never had a mandate to do something similar, something for Church property more habit like and something modified while out in the world or on vacation. I think because religious women didn't have the option of not wearing the habit in some situations, but rather a modified version of it more uniform like for outside, they went off the deep end by ridding themselves of it altogether, where men's orders tended not to do so, nor secular/diocesan priests.
Father McDonald,
One Order, the Madames of the Sacred Heart could go “in mufti” when out of the convent. Leftists, like Mark Thomas, don’t like costumes unless they are worn by men pretending to be women
The Congregation of Holy Cross Priests never went off the deep end, although certain of their members did. Although many abandoned wearing the habit in the late 1960s, most retained the practice of wearing clerical clothing In recent decades the younger priests and seminarians have returned to the practice of wearing the habit, particularly at their educational institutions and parishes. On the other hand, the Sisters of the Holy Cross abandoned religious garb and have become a rag tag outfit, with really no vocations to speak of, other than in the third world. But to lefties they are "vibrant" as they hobble on their walkers.
Father McDonald, I appreciate your response.
What a tremendous reduction in the amount of Sisters...from about 300 to 30. Incredible.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Father McDonald, here is an article (that I found interesting) from 11 years ago:
https://www.npr.org/2012/10/10/162650803/sisters-and-vatican-ii-a-generational-tug-of-war
Sisters And Vatican II: A Generational Tug Of War
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Father McDonald, here is an article (that I found interesting) from 11 years ago:
From 2010 A.D.
Very inspirational:
https://www.npr.org/2010/12/22/131753494/for-these-young-nuns-habits-are-the-new-radical
For These Young Nuns, Habits Are The New Radical
Pax.
Mark Thomas
The article cited by MT is from leftist, NPR. It is what you would expect. LOL
I attended Mass in Knoxville earlier this year. The parish was supported by Benedictine sister from the Nashville house. They wore the habit and were obviously unashamed. The NO service was respectful and fed my soul. It was a win-win.
There are a couple above who spoke of various orders abandoning their habits. Interesting to note, The Decree on the Renewal of Religious Life (Perfectae Caritatis - VII), mentions about still wearing a habit; not abandoning them:
17. The religious habit, an outward mark of consecration to God, should be simple and modest, poor and at the same becoming. In addition it must meet the requirements of health and be suited to the circumstances of time and place and to the needs of the ministry involved. The habits of both men and women religious which do not conform to these norms must be changed.
Catechiest Kiev,
When you think about it, the Vatican had no business interjecting itself in regulating religious habits and telling them they needed to be modified. Micromanagement on steroids. Of course, the Vatican was so successful that there are hardly any nuns left, except ones who wear traditional habits!
This message is for the non-braindead:
"The number of women religious in the United States has declined from a peak of 181,421 in 1965 to 47,160 in 2016, National Religious Retirement Office statistics show. About 77 percent of women religious are older than 70.
As many as 300 of the 420 religious institutes in the United States are in their last decades of existence because of aging membership and declining vocations, officials said.
Despite the trend, participants said they came away inspired." LOL
Sophia This excellent discussion of an example of an actual "PROPORTUNATE" reason was initially posted in January of this year, but Fr. K. studiously avoided it in his response at the time. Maybe he and Mark will reflect on it more keenly this time around:
'Sophia here: Fr. K. several of us on this blog, have asked you to share with us what your "proportionate" reason(s) is/are for voting for pro-abortion politicians especially over the last several cycles when they can definitely be characterized as pro-EXTREME abortion politicians. The operative word is "PROPORTIONATE". So of course we knew you did not have any. You merely have reasons (very unreasonable ones I may add!) This is precisely Why the Beloved Faithful, Guardian and Teacher of the perennial Teaching of Holy Mother Church and the Sacred Scriptures condemned "The Tyranny of Relativism" of which this is a prime example.
"Bishop Rene Gracida, Bishop Emeritus of Corpus Christi, Texas clarifies the teaching of the Church on voting for pro-abortion politicians.
'Since abortion and euthanasia have been defined by the Church as the most serious sins prevalent in our society, what kind of reasons could possibly be considered proportionate enough to justify a Catholic voting for a candidate who is known to be pro-abortion? None of the reasons commonly suggested could even begin to be proportionate enough to justify a Catholic voting for such a candidate. Reasons such as the candidate’s position on war, or taxes, or the death penalty, or immigration, or a national health plan, or social security, or aids, or homosexuality, or marriage, or any similar burning societal issues of our time are simply lacking in proportionality.
There is only one thing that could be considered proportionate enough to justify a Catholic voting for a candidate who is known to be pro-abortion, and that is the protection of innocent human life....'
Cont'd
Post a Comment