A reader writes:
Dear Jimmy,
As a frequent listener to "Catholic Answers Live" and
an occasional visitor to your blog, I have long been
impressed by both your charity and your ability to
stick to the facts when discussing even the most
contentious issues with callers who wish to "drag you
into the muck" and to engage in speculation about what
this or that priest or sister or bishop has said or
didn’t say.This is why I was so dismayed to read the most recent
entry on your blog entitled "Yes, It All Makes Sense
Now."I will be the first to agree that Sister Helen Timothy
was wrong to expel Katelyn Sills for her courageous
decision to reveal that a teacher at her school was
escorting students to Planned Parenthood to have
abortions. But contrary to your assertion that the
picture and article to which you linked "explain[ed] a
good bit," I was left asking "What exactly was the
point Jimmy was trying to make here"? And your
comment that "I’ve never understood those orders in
the habit of habitually having habits whose style is
best described as ‘office frumpy’" was unchartiable
and irrelevant to the facts of this case.
Thanks for writing. I appreciate your perspective, and I’ll try to clarify.
The point I was making is that the fact that Sr. Helen Timothy does not seem to wear a habit is consistent with some of the other things that have been reported about her, such has:
- Her apparent resistance to firing a woman who facilitated murders until ordered to do so by the bishop.
- Her apparent refusal to communicate with the Sills about this matter prior to the action.
- Her apparent refusal to support the bishop’s decision publicly (manifested in her referring all press inquiries to the bishop’s office).
- Her apparently unjust dismissal of Katelyn from the school.
The reason that the lack a habit is consistent with these is that there is presently an identity crisis among many religious. This identity crisis manifests itself in different ways, including a reluctance to embrace traditional Catholic teaching and values.
Among the traditional Catholic values that some religious have been reluctant to embrace is the value of traditional religious garb. Traditionally, Catholics have regarded such attire as an important sign of consecration to God and indicator of the social function and identity of the member of a religious community. Such garb has traditionally served as an identity marker, just as clerical garb is an identity marker for priests, police uniforms are identity markers for police officers, military uniforms are identity markers for members of the military, etc.
As the identity crisis has spread in religious circles, many have been reluctant to wear the traditional identity marker for their role (the habit) and have either unlawfully ceased wearing it or have sought to change their community’s charter such that the identity marker is toned down as much as possible, while remaining in minimal compliance with the ecclesiastical law. (For example, getting rid of veils and habits and instead wearing a religious pin or brooch–neither of which is visible in the picture of Sr. Helen Timothy).
The identity crisis in religious circles has not gone unnoticed by the laity, who have become suspicious of religious that do not wear the traditional identity markers for their roles.
Ordinary lay people recognize that the clothes a person wears tell you something about the person. This is true not only in cases where there are formal uniforms (as with a monk, a nun, a priest, a policeman, or a military officer) but even in cases where a particular style is informal.
The fact that I dress like a cowboy tells you something about me, where I come from, and what I identify with. It doesn’t tell you everything about me (e.g., most cowboys probably haven’t specialized in theology and canon law as much as I have, nor do they likely have the same interest level I do in ancient history, linguistics, and science fiction), but it does tell you something.
Similarly, "hippie" garb and "rapper" garb and "grunge" garb and "goth" garb tell you something about the people that choose to wear them. (As well as "milkman" garb and "McDonalds employee" garb and "businessman" garb, and every other kind of distinctive dress you can think of.)
Lay people know this instinctively, and when they meet a religious sister who does not wear the traditional identity marker for her role then they take it as a sign that the sister may be caught up in the identity crisis that affects so many religious these days.
That identity crisis affects more than just the outward identity markers of religious, though, it can also affect things like:
- Willingness to fire employees who are discovered to be facilitators of murder.
- Willingness to communicate with people who ask for such firings.
- Willingness to support bishops who order such firings.
- Willingness to expel students who prompted such firings.
Now, none of those things follow necessarily from failure to wear a habit, but they are correlated in a way that is notable to a lay audience. Hence the reader who e-mailed the picture and saying that it explains a lot without even needing to identify the element in the picture (the absence of a habit) that does the explaining.
The bottom line is that ordinary people realize that when someone has a particular social role but refuses to embrace the traditional identity markers of that role that it calls into question the degree to which they embrace the role itself.
People wouldn’t trust a neurosurgeon who showed up for work dressed as a chef or a judge who entered a courtroom dressed as on olympic swimmer and they tend not to trust religious sisters who dress as secular businesswomen.
They may not say it all the time, but for many there is always a background level of mistrust toward religious sisters who don’t wear religious habits.
In particular cases, it may not be the fault of the individual in question. Some may have joined their institute at a time when it was habited and then, over the objections of the individual, the institute changed its rules so that the habit is no longer permitted. In those cases the inability to wear a habit is a cross of suffering for the individual.
But that is an exceptional case, and in the main when one encounters a religious sister who doesn’t wear the traditional garb of the role one naturally asks questions like: "If this person is a religious sister then why doesn’t she want to be seen as a religious sister? Why does she want to be seen as a secular businesswoman instead? What’s going on here, and how deep does her lack of identification with the traditional role go?"
Same exact thing applies to monks who don’t wear habits and priests who don’t wear clericals or married people who don’t wear wedding rings.
Failure to wear the traditional identity markers raises questions about the individual’s attachment to his vocational identity.
I hope this sheds light on the point I was making.
Regarding the "office frumpy" remark, I woud disagree that it was irrelevant to the facts of the case for the reasons indicated above. As to its assessment from a perspective of charity, I don’t know that I would characterize it as uncharitable. Charity is not the same thing as politeness. Charity involves willing the good of others, and I think it good for those who wear such garb to realize how it strikes others.
If it was not sufficiently polite then I would mention that I was in searing neck pain when I wrote that post and I apologize again for all my shortcomings.
Here in Chicago the most visible habited nuns are the Daughters of St. Paul and the Little Sisters of the Poor, and I’m always struck by how *young* these nuns seem to be, unlike the polyester-pantsuit brigade who all seem to be 65 and over. So the problem may be phasing itself out.
Dumping the habit was a terrible idea because it left the sisters with the worst of both worlds. The habit, as well as being a religious marker, freed you from the nuisance of fussing with your clothes and hairstyle and otherwise making yourself presentable to the world-at-large. But nuns who’ve taken a vow of poverty are probably going to feel uneasy about investing in cosmetics and tailored suits or anything that projects authority or purpose. The result, as you said, is “office frumpy” – dull and sad, neither in the world nor out of it, but just creeping along at the edge, having no idea where it belongs. Maybe this explains their susceptibility to bad ideas.
I agree with all of Jimmy’s comments about religious habits and the consequences of personal appearance. Our clothes send a message,as does our hairstyles and every way we present ourselves. However, everyone is tiptoeing around the elephant in the living room –this woman gives every appearance of being a LESBIAN. I am not saying that she is–but with all the recent affliction the Church has suffered from homosexual priests, anyone in religious life who gives even the appearance of being a homosexual is doing the Church a grave disservice, and there is much that this woman could do to tone down the “bull-d—” appearance she gives. Finally, if she IS a Lesbian, then that would explain a lot, as homosexuals by their very nature reject the teachings of the Church on human sexuality and reproduction. Again, we don’t know, but it sure has the appearance of something…disordered.
I know, despite promising to do so, I haven’t yet commented on my view of the religious habit. After finals.
But- I do want to comment on this: “This woman gives every appearence of being a lesbian.”
Scuse me? Lesbians and gays look a lot of different ways. Some lesbians look “butch,” many do not. Some gays look “gay,” many do not. Comments like this keep the Church from teaching the truth about sexuality to seriously disordered people.
As regular commenters probably realize, my Catholicism’s orthodoxy can hardly be called into question, but, come on people! If we sound like old, angry, “prejudiced” grumps instead of charitable, joyful people, we lose souls.
Last week I was at my parish religous education board meeting. The sister who is in charge of childrens religous ed mentioned that she had asked a number of people to volunteer for some task that is not that big and all had turned her down. I din’t say anything but I thought to myself “if you were to where a habit I bet you would have had more success”. I personally think it is harder to refuse someone who clearly wears their commitment to God.
I just don’t understand why religious don’t wear habits. There are several Franciscans in my area who are good priests and brothers and I feel that they would make a greater impact with the habit. The new head pastor always wears his habit (of course he used to head of recruiting at his provincal headquarters).
Religious are called to give the world their heroic witness to the Gospel. Without the habit, they provide the same witness as the laity who do similar work. They fail to provide “heroic” witness. IMHO
Thank you, Jimmy, for making the comparison include wedding rings. My wedding ring is my “sign of contradiction” in these times. If I’m at the grocery store, surrounded by the “jewels in my crown” (my children) and am sans wedding ring, well, I’m just fitting in with the current crowd. But wearing my ring says something different, without saying anything.
As an additional note, there is the story of the man who was delivering goods for the poor to some Missionaries of Charity. He wanted to give them something as well, so he gave them some shampoo. They laughed (thoroughly delightfully) and said, “you silly man, we don’t have time to take care of our hair when we serve the poor, we just shave it off!”
A nun who wears her habit is telling everyone who sees her: “Jesus is my Spouse, and I love Him.” When I see someone dressed in secular clothes identified as a nun, I wonder if she is ashamed of her Spouse.
I was at the mass for re-dedication of the Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament in Sacramento yesterday afternoon (restored to its original beauty, not wreck-o-vated) & there were many priests & religious in attendance. Among them were 4 Missionaries of Charity sisters. How striking it was to see them – & how popular they were with the lay folk – next to the religious who were in varying stages of habit. Fascinating! We’re drawn to those who’ve set themselves apart, it seemed to me. We’re appreciative of it. There’s something about it that hits folks on a visceral level to see individuals who have set themselves apart, as a sign of contradiction, for the rest of us to see. It’s an almost confrontational witness for Christ. It forces us to re-evaluate & look inward. A very powerful witness, indeed. I have no idea why any religious would pass up the opportunity to witness for Christ in such a beautiful & powerful way!
(The Cathedral, BTW, is stunning! Those who find themselves in Sacramento owe it to themselves to stop by. Words simply can not describe how beautiful that church is!)
A priest friend of mine, who is also a former FBI agent, once told me that priests and nuns who do not wear their collars or habits in public are involved in a life of sin.
It was a interesting comment and I asked a second priest friend who is a diocesan priest,
if he thought there was any truth in that comment. He said,
” Absolutely,they are ashamed of their vocation and are dressed in civilian clothes so they will not be recognized in public.”
As to calling someone who looks a certain way a lesbian, I think that is not being fair.
I know a ex-nun, about 60 ish, who looks like this AND lives with a ex-nun who is also about 60 ish. Both have short hair and are what I call, ‘dishonest liberal Catholics ‘.
But I would not say they are lesbians. And even if they TOLD me they were lesbians, it would be a sin to spread such information to others.
The fact that we may know embarassing things about others, is not a license to then spread that information. Remember, PRUDENCE is the HIGHEST VIRTUE.
Another priest once told me he was now ashamed to wear his priestly collar in public because of the publicity over sexual abuse by priests. I told him, “Jesus chose to be counted among sinners.”
I have heard priests and sisters say that Jesus wore no distinctive clothing or habit. To that I would respond that despite the lack of distinctive garb Jesus was in the HABIT of calling the attention of thousands to himself.
Some say that the collar or the habit serves as a barrier. I say both “Yes” and “No.” Like the wedding ring, the collar says, “Not available.” However, the collar or the habit also says, “Available as Christ would have it.” Because of my priestly or religious garb, I have had people approach me in public who have needed for years to talk to a priest. The uniform of a doctor or nurse doesn’t seem to be a barrier for their patients.
The religious communities that are dying seem to me to all have in common the lack of a habit.
Those that are growing or even bursting at the seams all appear to wear a habit.
I would point out the wedding ring of a married person is also “religous habit” conferred at the profession of public marriage vows.
The first level of force in law enforcement is mere presence. The mere presence of a uniformed officer is sufficient to deter crime.
Priests and nuns and monks in their traditional garb have much the same power. Their mere presence does the world good. Even non-Catholics and non-Christians know and respect what a Roman collar means.
Superheroes wear uniforms. Sometimes by the very fact of being seen in a uniform, they become targets of both their enemies and those who are honestly confused.
But no matter what happens to them, they are still HEROES nonetheless.
(Cue Superman music: baaah badadaaaah ….)
Also, I cannot help but notice that communities of religious who forego the habit more often than not serve the needs of Protestants.
There is nothing wrong in that, really. It is just that in spite of the fact they are Catholics who are supposedly living a much more dedicated life to God, they cannot help the spiritual journey of me, the average Catholic.
What they offer is sort of watered down “Catholic-lite” that is more sentimentality than spirituality (a common point of confusion among Protestants).
If I need a guidance and solace because the world batters my views on abortion, birth control and homosexuality I can go to them to get something quasi-Protestant or even quasi-Pagan.
But I do not get fed. I do not find solace. Instead, I have to put my anti-heresy guard back up and do battle again with these supposed “‘allies.”
Most of the Protestants who come to these religious come only to have their beliefs confirmed. They are not challenged to enter into the deeper spirituality that only the Mystical Body of Christ can offer. To them, there is no ostensible difference between the faith they already practice and the faith offered by Christ’s Church.
My question: if as a monk or nun or other religious you are of no service to your fellow Catholic, what good are you? If you have no interest in serving God’s Church, Whom do you serve?
One of my greatest moments of spiritual development was a weekend retreat with the hermits of a Carmelite hermitage in Texas. It was there that I was taught about one of my most powerful spiritual gifts. The hermits were their habits 24-7. Praise God!! ^o^
I think Hartmeister made an excellent point:
“I just don’t understand why religious don’t wear habits. There are several Franciscans in my area who are good priests and brothers and I feel that they would make a greater impact with the habit. The new head pastor always wears his habit (of course he used to head of recruiting at his provincal headquarters).”
And we wonder why vocations have been in decline? Note that the head of recruiting made sure to wear his “uniform”.
I remember when a colleague of mine and I were getting together at an Italian restaurant to discuss a retreat we were directing. We were waiting for a priest friend of mine to meet us, and I was not facing the door. So, my colleague asks me, “how will I know he’s here… oh wait! nevermind.” At that moment, he walked in the door with another religious brother – they were both from the Legionaries of Christ, so they both wore the standard black outfit, the priest wearing the collar.
It makes people take notice and serves as a reminder to the average lay person that there is another reality beyond what we see everyday. And I think that’s just one of many reasons why the L of C has expanding so rapidly, while other orders (even diocesan) are stuggling for vocations.
I’m really glad to have found this subject being discussed.
I’m a novice in a religious order. Before I was in this particular order I was a U.S. Marine. I enlisted into the Marine Corps infantry for its distinguishing challenges and my wanting to sacrifice self for greater good. I joined this particular order for the same purpose.
Needless to say, I loved wearing my Marine uniform. To some people I was a symbol of glory and heroism and when people called me a baby killer “I set my face like flint” which made those who loved Marines, like us more for how tough we were physically and emotionally.
Before joining the Order I decided to be no different, I would wear the habit all the time and set my face like flint even when others condemned me for it. I decided that I’d be more useful as a symbol. I’d use my “habited” presence to bring good into the world. On a lighter note it would work kind of like Batman as seen in the somewhat recent movie “Batman: Begins”.
Now, I’m coming close to vows and things have changed within me, some good and some unexpected. For one, I’m knowledgeable, more prayerful but curiously, I’m scared to be seen in my habit. Can you believe I’m scared?
Before entering I knew the other brothers didn’t wear their habit often or at all. After entering I never suspected that I’d be restricted from wearing it on any other occasion besides liturgical settings. Before entering, I would think to myself ” no big deal” I’ll just wait until after solemn vows and they wouldn’t be able to kick me for such a mundane detail.
Today, I’m not so sure I can make it through to solemn vows without getting in the habit of not wearing the habit at all.
Today, I feel more immediately bombarded by crazy theology and heretical agendas and the last thing I need is more pressure.
On one side, I’m afraid that if I go some place public in my Habit I’ll get a thousand stares or will be deliberately ignored which brings all the projected fears of my brothers on to my conscience. Do I deal with this when all I want is a cup of coffee?
On the other side, I want uniformity with the ideas of my founder all the way down to his look. I want to exhibit my fearlessness and be admired for it only so I can give all the glory to my God.
In the Marines people would stare, yes.
However, in the religious orders even our very own fellow Catholics will hate our guts for standing against something that they deem as “oppressive” or “archaic”.
Sure, you earn cool points with select Catholics, but those cool points will earn you just enough attention to set you up for a mass of point deductions that St. Peter himself couldn’t recover from. You’ll be in the lime light and battle with issues as simple as: you looked at someone in a way they didn’t like, or you said something they didn’t like, or your tone was wrong when you said something they DID like.
Don’t get me wrong, this doesn’t mean that religious shouldn’t be held accountable for their actions. However, I don’t want to be held accountable for an alledged angry look I gave when the fact of the matter is: I was in deep thought when the accuser asked me a question I didn’t understand.
What makes misunderstandings like this worse is that in the offended persons eyes you wore a habit which disgraced anyone who has ever worn one. And now according to them and many others you’ve traumitized them in the way Sister Mary of the Seven Nails traumitized another when they were in second grade.
Try and imagine, all of this combined with yourself trying to discern if you belong in the priesthood or religious life. The questions become: do I care enough about the order anymore to try and promote it and by wearing it’s habit when brothers don’t want me to wear it anyways?
A common response is often… “Do it for God do it for the Church, pray”! Shoot man, THAT would be my response to the question of why I am even here admidst such maddness.
Meanwhile, the numbers of nuns and priests decline and no one even knows what the heck a _____ is much less where one is, looks like and how one acts.
But you all have got one thing right by my opinion..
Old traditions have been surpressed and
The Catholic identity is in duress.
This is in reply to Brother Andrew. Dear Brother in Christ: Please wear your habit. Your wearing of the habit is a visible sign to lay Catholics like me that you are a dedicated man of God. When I lived in Mexico, I saw many nuns who were wearing their habit. I was intrigued by these women who gave up the possibility of a home and family to completely dedicate themselves to God’s service. This may have been one small part of what attracted me to the Catholic Church when I converted 10 years ago. The wearing of religious attire is encouraging to the general public as well(even if it can be a little intimidating or arouse curiousity.)The best thing about this curiousity is it gives you a chance to explain the Faith and why you believe. P.S. My son is in the US Navy and I am very proud to see him in his uniform. God bless you.
I like to wear my habit. And I am 17.
Office furniture.
Bestar office furniture. Office furniture. Home office furniture. Contemporary home office furniture. Discount office furniture.