[HN Gopher] A US socialite who gave it all up to become a Carmel...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       A US socialite who gave it all up to become a Carmelite nun
        
       Author : pepys
       Score  : 145 points
       Date   : 2021-06-11 04:09 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.bbc.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.bbc.com)
        
       | VoodooJuJu wrote:
       | I think she had her priorities a little mixed up. When you have a
       | son, your duty, your number one priority, is him. Abandoning your
       | child is a crime against humanity.
        
       | rmk wrote:
       | What a remarkable, long-lived life! It's common to turn one's
       | attention to spiritual pursuits in one's old age, but a full
       | third of one's life is very long and unusual indeed.
       | 
       | An excellent human interest story!
        
         | akudha wrote:
         | It is amazing that she could do such a radical change
         | overnight, that too at an older age. Like, how can one go from
         | luxurious lifestyle to sleeping on the floor overnight? Most
         | people would have trouble giving up their luxuries for a couple
         | of days.
         | 
         | Incredible!
        
           | susiecambria wrote:
           | In action it was overnight, but she was drawn to being a nun
           | from an early age. I'm sure that this idea, this dream was
           | always in the back of her mind.
           | 
           | But I do take your point. Dropping everything. Heck, I can't
           | miss a coffee in the morning! But it does show internal (and
           | external) fortitude.
        
         | tw04 wrote:
         | Not to downplay her commitment, but given she joined
         | immediately after her husband died, perhaps she wasn't thinking
         | it was going to be for a full third of her life when she
         | started.
        
           | rmk wrote:
           | No doubt that is almost certainly true, but if you read the
           | article, you will find that she was intending to become a nun
           | when she fell in love and started a family. It sounds like
           | she practically postponed her dream of becoming a nun and got
           | the family responsibilities over with before heading to the
           | cloister.
        
           | Thorrez wrote:
           | >On her 61st birthday [...] [s]he told her guests she had
           | devoted her first 30 years of life to herself, the second 30
           | to her children and that the last third of her life would be
           | dedicated to God.
           | 
           | Even if it was just a joke, she probably at least knew it was
           | a possibility.
        
       | bobthechef wrote:
       | Reminds me of Dolores Hart (who is now an abbess, IIRC).
       | 
       | I can't say the comments here shock me, exactly, but they
       | certainly are revealing. Specifically, so many of them pass
       | judgement on this woman as if she had done something terrible and
       | project their own categories onto her, characterizing this,
       | without the slightest shred of evidence, as somehow sad. How lost
       | one must be to claim such a thing!
       | 
       | Sister Mary Joseph had only chosen to be a Carmelite nun after
       | her husband had died and her children had grown up. She had no
       | dependents or husbands for whom or to whom she was responsible
       | anymore. She was not a single mother who had somehow abandoned
       | her children. Would she miss her children? Probably, but she
       | found a higher calling for which she sacrificed such contact and
       | there is no higher calling than the religious life. In her case,
       | she clearly felt called to devote herself in this particular way.
       | I have no reason to presume that she didn't know what she was
       | getting herself into (besides, religious orders do not simply let
       | anybody in who isn't serious or even qualified in basic ways). Do
       | her children miss her? Arguably, yes, but if they remain in the
       | faith and see the world through a Catholic lens, they are likely
       | to be joyful about having pursued this calling. There is nothing
       | sad about it. It is a very joyful and wonderful thing. It is
       | inspiring.
       | 
       | Catholics (not of the cafeteria variety, anyway) find happiness
       | in sacrificing lesser goods for higher goods and in the
       | sanctification that comes with the suffering life will inevitably
       | inflict on us. So let's just say she didn't join the order to be
       | comfortable, but to grow spiritually in a particularly austere
       | order. If you aren't Catholic, this may not make much sense to
       | you. Someone who is a slave to comfort and whose horizons are
       | severely limited and parochial will think this is downright
       | crazy. But the Catholic understanding of reality, of Man, and of
       | God imparts a vertical dimension and a breadth that is absent
       | otherwise. Catholic anthropology is not reductive, and Man, after
       | all, does not live by bread alone.
        
       | lurquer wrote:
       | Reminds me of that Nun who gave it all up to become an Austrian
       | socialite. Van Trap something?
        
         | ceejayoz wrote:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_von_Trapp
        
           | astrange wrote:
           | Not a very flattering picture.
        
         | geerlingguy wrote:
         | In her case, I think she was still a 'postulate', basically in
         | preparation to become a nun, and the 'Mother Superior' or
         | whatever the head nun was at her convent told her she should
         | marry Captain Avon Trapp. Sometimes reality is stranger than
         | fiction!
        
         | iammisc wrote:
         | I don't think she gave it up to be a socialite. She gave it up
         | to be with the children. Her biography is very interesting
        
           | dragonwriter wrote:
           | She "gave it up" because she was directed by her religious
           | superior to do so, and was initially unhappy about it. (As
           | well as shifting timing related to external political events,
           | the popular musical retelling changes this, because it makes
           | a less simplistically charming narrative.)
        
       | nautilus12 wrote:
       | Alot of these comments seem to be some form of trying to justify
       | her decision as not being unique or spiritually inspired. I would
       | encourage you to let things be what they are and not over analyze
       | them
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | agomez314 wrote:
       | I wish the article delved more into the rich spiritual life that
       | these people have. The article dwells on the material goods and
       | lavish lifestyle and abruptly shoves up the fact that she
       | abandoned it all - almost as if the author can't believe it
       | herself!
       | 
       | Recently I passed the Philadelphia downtown and noticed an amish
       | family selling flowers from their truck. A large crowd gathered
       | and wondered at the sight of the industrious family in 19th
       | century garb. It's a sight unlike many city-dwellers, especially
       | young people, get to see: chastity, family, religious devotion.
       | People of today are so used to living in a culture that tells
       | them owning more, having sex and expressing "your identity" is
       | the path to happiness that many become stumped when shown this
       | amish family doing business in a world so totally different than
       | their own.
       | 
       | I love it. This is diversity of thought and lifestyle. In
       | comparison, modern culture is extremely homogeneous and boring. I
       | appreciate the witness of Ann Russel as a person who shows us
       | that there's more to life than what we can see and touch, and
       | that there's great joy in seeking spiritual union with God.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | cheese_goddess wrote:
         | > This is diversity of thought and lifestyle.
         | 
         | Compared to everyone who is not a member of those communities,
         | perhaps. But for the people who grow inside those communities,
         | there's no diversity, the nail that sticks up is hammered down
         | and everyone is just like everyone else. After all, those are
         | religious cults that actively discourage diversity and
         | encourage conformity to the community's norms.
        
         | dangus wrote:
         | Your views remind me of this article I read a while back:
         | 
         | https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/18/gender-studies-professo...
         | 
         | I find the concept of pleasure oppression to be interesting.
         | Essentially, the idea is that puritanical roots teach us that
         | things that are pleasurable must be sinful and wrong, and that
         | the oppression is felt most strongly by marginalized groups.
         | 
         | Your positive manifestation of the simple life is living like
         | the Amish. What you've omitted is the fact that the
         | Amish/Mennonite societies run as authoritarian patriarchies,
         | where the bishop figure and head of household (the husband)
         | have the final word.
         | 
         | I think there is a misconception that religious people have
         | about the non-religious where they assume non-religious people
         | are living a life of consumerism and materialism in lieu of
         | God.
         | 
         | Ultimately, those concepts aren't related: believing in a
         | particular brand of God isn't a prerequisite to helping one
         | another and living a life of service to others. The non-
         | religious just don't accept biblical stories as fact, and they
         | might believe that any sort of afterlife is not a realistic
         | expectation.
         | 
         | The religious and non-religious alike live within a wide
         | spectrum of materialism. There are certainly materialistic
         | Christians and materialistic atheists, but there are also the
         | opposite.
         | 
         | Locking yourself in a self-imposed religious prison for 30
         | years is on the extreme end of the spectrum. The reason it's a
         | news article is because it's an incredibly rare, strange thing
         | to do. In my opinion, this reputation of strangeness is
         | rightfully deserved.
        
           | agomez314 wrote:
           | I think you're misunderstanding and reading too much from my
           | argument. The thrust of it is that I sincerely believe modern
           | society (by which I mean Western, US culture 2020s) places a
           | heavy emphasis on consumption and reaping of pleasure as much
           | as possible and that this culture is oppressive and coerces
           | people to do the same lest they be labeled "old-fashioned,
           | cultist" or worse, "religious" (which in itself carries a bad
           | connotation nowadays).
           | 
           | The fact that the story is strange to you goes straight to my
           | point. Throughout history, monks, wisemen and religious
           | figures have retreated from the world to seek spiritual
           | peace. There's extensive literature and history that shows
           | this to be valid path for a person to take, if they so wish
           | and are in the disposition to do so.
        
             | dangus wrote:
             | Frankly, I read into your comment as much as I did because
             | it came across as not-so-subtle preaching.
        
             | [deleted]
        
       | TMWNN wrote:
       | Dolores Hart (<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolores_Hart>) left
       | Hollywood to become a Benedictine nun.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | personlurking wrote:
       | I think the problem could have been avoided if she had entered a
       | less strict convent/order (I imagine such a thing exists). That
       | way she could devote her life to it yet still have visiting
       | rights under normal conditions.
       | 
       | As an anecdote/aside, I have a long time friend who - when we met
       | - wasn't religious or spiritual in any outwardly noticeable way.
       | She had a handful of interests, enjoyed discussing many life
       | topics, and had a well-paying sales job with a good company. As
       | the years went on, she had three kids from unhealthy romantic
       | relationships, became more and more spiritual and gave up her job
       | to start a part-time, new age micro business. Not only did her
       | income go way, way down to the point that she constantly
       | struggles to pay her bills, but everything she says is
       | spiritually-motivated. In a real sense, she stopped being a
       | person and became a mouth-piece of her spiritual beliefs. I
       | recently realized she's no different than a monk or a nun (whose
       | beliefs are weaved into everything they say), only she still
       | lives in the real world.
       | 
       | As a result of all this, our deep and diverse weekly discussions
       | became less and less frequent (to the point of being almost non-
       | existent), not to mention extremely unidimensional. She might as
       | well have gone to live in a convent because I lost my friend all
       | the same. Am I happy she's happy doing what she loves? Sure, but
       | I also mourn the almost complete loss of the person I knew.
        
         | dragonwriter wrote:
         | > I think the problem could have been avoided if she had
         | entered a less strict convent/order (I imagine such a thing
         | exists).
         | 
         | Non-cloistered orders not only exist, but are the largest for
         | both men and women.
        
         | codingdave wrote:
         | > no different than a monk or a nun (whose beliefs are weaved
         | into everything they say)
         | 
         | How many monks or nuns have you know? I grew up going to
         | Catholic schools, and can assure you that monks, nun, and
         | priests are real people who have real conversation. Maybe not
         | the ones who choose to join the specific order the woman from
         | the article joined, but in general, yes.
         | 
         | I can sympathize that your friend grew apart from you. I've had
         | friends do the same. But that is life. It would be short-
         | sighted to write off entire groups of people because of one
         | person's experience.
        
           | personlurking wrote:
           | >I grew up going to Catholic schools
           | 
           | Me, too. Church every Sunday and Bible studies every week
           | (for many years), plus Catholic school (for a year).
           | 
           | I'm not saying they are one-dimentional. I'm saying their
           | views on many subjects tend to be filtered through their
           | religious belief. Different from a plumber, a banker or a
           | teacher who wouldn't filter their perspectives on many
           | subjects through their vocation.
        
             | dragonwriter wrote:
             | > Different from a plumber, a banker or a teacher who
             | wouldn't filter their perspectives on many subjects through
             | their vocation.
             | 
             | Not their job, but in many cases they'd filter it through
             | their religious, political, or otherwise ideological
             | beliefs. Which, ib the case of specifically Catholic
             | religious views would (as well as their status as a married
             | person or committed single) be considered as much part of
             | their vocation as it would be for someone called to
             | religious life and/or holy orders.
        
           | Mediterraneo10 wrote:
           | Roman Catholics monks often being "real people who have real
           | conversation" is largely the result of certain monastic
           | orders being created with laxer rules on interacting with the
           | secular world. Historically, and still today within stricter
           | Catholics orders and in the Eastern Orthodox tradition, monks
           | and nuns are encouraged to limit conversation on secular
           | themes. Definitely one can go and interact with the monks or
           | nuns, but that interaction is best limited to conversation on
           | spiritual themes, discussion of work that has to be done, or
           | just enjoying the silence together.
        
       | pyuser583 wrote:
       | A very different San Francisco.
       | 
       | I've had dinner at that Hilton several times.
        
       | neom wrote:
       | I watched this movie a few years ago, I _highly_ recommend it:
       | https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1613092/
       | 
       | Anyway, it features a guy who left his well paid finance job to
       | go dedicate his life to working at the Kalighat Home for the
       | Dying. The whole movie is inspiring, but that particular section
       | stuck with me.
       | 
       | It's stories like this article and the one in the movie I
       | mentioned that make me excited for later life. Although,
       | sometimes I think I should do it today...
        
         | pstuart wrote:
         | > make me excited for later life
         | 
         | The trick is to be excited for _today_. Of course that 's much
         | easier said than done ;-)
        
         | kQq9oHeAz6wLLS wrote:
         | You should check out Katie Davis Majors'[1] story for someone
         | who took the plunge early, and never regretted it.
         | 
         | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katie_Davis_(missionary)
        
       | weinzierl wrote:
       | I had a Deja vu reading this BBC article because it is so close
       | to the original Twitter thread, which appeared on my timeline a
       | few days ago, that in my opinion it is borderline plagiarism. At
       | least the BBC had the decency to link to the original source
       | which most other newspapers never do nowadays.
       | 
       | To save you the detour to the BBC website here is the original:
       | 
       | https://twitter.com/4t9ner/status/1401458601462403077?s=21
        
       | cortesoft wrote:
       | I am torn on this. On one hand I applaud someone who follows
       | their dream in spite of societal pressures.
       | 
       | On the other hand, she only saw her son twice in 30 years. I
       | would be pretty upset at my mom if she did that, and I can't
       | imagine doing that to my kids. Not meeting my grandkids, even
       | though I am still alive? That is unimaginable to me.
        
         | sudosteph wrote:
         | Eh, my mom's not 60 yet - but I wouldn't be mad at her if she
         | did something like this (not that she ever would). I think
         | parents are entitled to be individuals, especially if they've
         | already fulfilled the core parental duties of raising their own
         | children. They don't owe their kids anything else after that.
        
           | MisterBastahrd wrote:
           | Parents have a responsibility when they create a child that
           | doesn't disappear simply because that kid becomes an adult.
           | If every 18 year old on the planet were left to their own
           | devices, it would be an absolute disaster.
        
             | toast0 wrote:
             | She did disappear, but if her kids were all doing fine, and
             | the kids each had 9 siblings to turn of in case of trouble,
             | I think she did her parental duty, and so why should she
             | not follow her calling?
             | 
             | It sounds like she considered it for five years, most
             | likely in communication with her children, and then decided
             | to go ahead with the plan. Of the many things one could
             | decide to do at age 60, this one doesn't sound too bad.
        
             | CalRobert wrote:
             | Or, as a counterpoint, no they don't. 18 year olds are
             | adults.
        
               | MisterBastahrd wrote:
               | That isn't a counterpoint, and it's frankly ridiculous
               | given any sort of actual consideration of the modern
               | world.
        
               | CalRobert wrote:
               | Ok, when are people grown up?
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | robbintt wrote:
               | They don't. But we often put on a good show.
        
             | iammisc wrote:
             | Catholic monastic orders aren't going to accept parents
             | unless they can demonstrate they've already performed their
             | religious duties to children. My guess would be the
             | children were okay with it, and she had to show the order.
             | Given her previous occupation, I doubt her children were
             | left materially wanting
        
             | treyfitty wrote:
             | What do you mean? A lot of my friends and I gained
             | independence at 18, and it was liberating for us. Not sure
             | what disaster was supposed to ensue.
        
               | ironmagma wrote:
               | Independence yes, but complete independence in every way?
               | Of course not. There is an offramping period, and for
               | many, the benefits of familial bonds continue throughout
               | life including things like a safety net in case you lose
               | your job.
        
               | MisterBastahrd wrote:
               | I'm sure you're really special.
               | 
               | Most 18 year olds aren't remotely ready for complete
               | isolation from their parents, though.
        
               | maccard wrote:
               | I moved out at 18. I still remember phoning my dad about
               | 3 months later panicking because I didn't realise that my
               | gas and electricity bills were two separate things that
               | had to be paid.
               | 
               | I was independent, buyi was definitely not ready for
               | isolation.
        
               | Grustaf wrote:
               | Just as a counterpoint, moving out at 18 is the norm here
               | in the Nordics, living with your parents when you're 22
               | is considered weird.
        
             | Torwald wrote:
             | How does society help parents of 18 year olds with that
             | tasks?
             | 
             | I see expensive college and unlike it used to be it is
             | nowadays an open question wether you will recoup the cost.
             | Military recruiters trying to "get" your kids. In some
             | countries you can get paid therapy via health care.
        
               | randomdata wrote:
               | When did you ever recoup your cost? Incomes held stagnant
               | through the rise of college attainment, which means that
               | there was no increase in pay to cover the cost.
        
             | decremental wrote:
             | I generally agree. Though we've sort of swung in the
             | opposite direction it seems where parents will fail to
             | instill an upbringing that doesn't end up with their kids
             | being 35 and still at home. Also an absolute disaster by my
             | estimation.
        
             | splithalf wrote:
             | Rich parents are very different. Imagine sending your
             | children off to boarding school! But that's seen as
             | perfectly normal in rich people culture, and has been for
             | centuries.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | xwdv wrote:
         | Life does not revolve around a child, especially when you have
         | several. Grandchildren even less.
         | 
         | A parent roamed the earth with their own desires and business
         | long before a child came into the world. Children may feel they
         | are the most important thing in a parent's life because they
         | are constantly fed, watered, and sheltered without fail, and
         | they have known their parent their whole life. But a child is
         | only a small phase of a parent's life, a small piece of a
         | larger plan, or sometimes no plan at all.
        
           | Grustaf wrote:
           | > Life does not revolve around a child
           | 
           | Of course it does - while they actually are children they
           | should be your number 1 priority and the focus of all you do.
           | But once they're adults it's a different story altogether.
        
         | xenocyon wrote:
         | It may be shocking, but this is often what happens when people
         | discover their monastic calling in adulthood. Buddha famously
         | abandoned his wife and infant son when he decided to pursue his
         | path.
         | 
         | Furthermore, some people have little contact with their
         | children for even weaker reasons. The fact is that we are
         | inclined to judge women harshly for actions which would hardly
         | seem remarkable for, say, a male rock star.
        
           | garmaine wrote:
           | > The fact is that we are inclined to judge women harshly for
           | actions which would hardly seem remarkable for, say, a male
           | rock star.
           | 
           | I don't think this is true. Walk-out dads are judged very
           | harshly by our culture too.
        
             | iammisc wrote:
             | Her children would have been way past childhood by the time
             | she became a nun... like way past.
        
               | jl6 wrote:
               | But being a parent doesn't end when the kid turns 18.
        
               | CalRobert wrote:
               | The part where you live to fulfill their needs does,
               | though.
        
               | hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
               | I would hope there is some middle ground between "live to
               | fulfill their needs" and "seeing them twice in 30 years
               | and never seeing your grandchildren".
        
               | threatofrain wrote:
               | I'd argue that fulfilling a child's needs is the bedrock
               | to a more important parental goal -- helping your
               | children attain optimism in a world where many people
               | lose.
        
               | iammisc wrote:
               | Being religious is already enough though. Catholics
               | attending mass are least likely to commit suicide amongst
               | other outcomes
        
               | vanattab wrote:
               | It doesn't for many patents. Many people draw meaning
               | from life through their close relationships.
        
               | watwut wrote:
               | By the time the offspring is 30, parents are free to make
               | decisions for themselves. At that point, many children
               | themselves left miles away and have only sporadic contact
               | due to living independently. Or joimed army. It is absurd
               | to talk about it as if they were 5.
               | 
               | There is be way to become nun or monk without leaving
               | your parents, siblings, friends, literally everyone.
        
               | Grustaf wrote:
               | Depends on which monastic order you join. Some are
               | extremely strict.
               | 
               | Completely agree about "abandoning" your adult children.
        
             | e17 wrote:
             | I'm not sure this is true, the prime minister of the United
             | Kingdom is literally a deadbeat dad. He went to court to
             | disown one of his children and it's not public knowledge
             | how many children he actually has.
        
               | bencollier49 wrote:
               | That's complete and utter rubbish. He's had several
               | relationships, and is clearly a philanderer, but no-one
               | has any idea of the nature of his financial or personal
               | relationships with his children, because they're private.
               | He went to court to try to preserve that privacy.
        
               | e17 wrote:
               | Which bit is rubish? You haven't refuted my points with
               | anything of substance. He's a public figure, if he wants
               | privacy he shouldn't have run in national elections. He
               | had an injunction on the McIntyre child, that sounds like
               | disownment to me. "I love you, child, but nobody can know
               | about you" He has no contact with any of his children
               | apart from the new one, that's a deadbeat dad. We do not
               | know how many children he has. Does he?
        
               | hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
               | > He's a public figure, if he wants privacy he shouldn't
               | have run in national elections.
               | 
               | Others have commented on how absolutely ridiculous and
               | insane this is, but it also highlights one reason (among
               | many) that we generally have such shitty politicians. If
               | you believe that running in national elections should
               | make every single aspect of your private life open to
               | public scrutiny, don't be surprised if the types of
               | people willing to run for public office only care about
               | increasing their own power.
        
               | WastingMyTime89 wrote:
               | > He's a public figure, if he wants privacy he shouldn't
               | have run in national elections.
               | 
               | That's rubbish. His public life has nothing to do with
               | his private life. The fact that he is a politician
               | doesn't mean the public has to know about his
               | relationship with his children. His public actions speak
               | loud enough for people to judge his quality (or lack
               | thereof) as an elected official.
               | 
               | I think the cultural gap between American and European on
               | this point will probably never be bridged.
        
               | bencollier49 wrote:
               | Of course he sees his children; there are plenty of
               | documented occasions when he's been with them recently,
               | and why would we know about the others?
               | 
               | Having an injunction on naming a child isn't disownment.
               | It's protecting the privacy of the child. Name it, and
               | now it needs police protection 24/7.
               | 
               | Your characterisation is way off track IMO, but it's a
               | popular viewpoint on Twitter and in the Guardian.
        
           | dbt00 wrote:
           | Eh, Steve Jobs still gets shit around here for the way he
           | treated his first daughter (and rightfully so).
        
             | imwillofficial wrote:
             | Are you comparing Steve Jobs refusing to pay child support
             | for His daughter to Buddha?
        
             | Torwald wrote:
             | Are you talking about Lisa?
        
         | toyg wrote:
         | She did see _some_ grandchildren - tbh, with so many children,
         | keeping track of every single one of their spawn would be hard
         | even for a normal person.
         | 
         | Also, from back-of-envelop calculations, by the time she joined
         | the convent her youngest child was in their 30s, the oldest in
         | her 40s. It's not too different, in practice, from entering a
         | hospice because of health issues.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | xwolfi wrote:
         | Bah god is more important than your whiny grandkids, and by
         | spending all this time in prayer she's surely helping them.
         | 
         | Religion is an ideological cancer: no need to be torn, this
         | person followed an obsessive sickness, not a dream.
        
           | narrator wrote:
           | Edit: You actually got canceled. I retract my comment.
        
         | iammisc wrote:
         | > I would be pretty upset at my mom if she did that, and I
         | can't imagine doing that to my kids.
         | 
         | Are you or your kids Catholic? I mean... some parents would be
         | upset if their children decided to become vowed celibates, but
         | if you're Catholic, and all your children decided to do this,
         | you may be able to be happy. I am honestly shocked here that
         | Hacker News is responding to this happening as if it is taking
         | place in secular society, when the entire family seems
         | religious.
        
         | chairmanwow1 wrote:
         | Yeah, I think this fact shifts this story out of laudable
         | territory for me. I think this is a really sad story.
        
         | canadianfella wrote:
         | > she only saw her son twice in 30 years.
         | 
         | She is a piece of shit and religion needs to be criticized more
         | often.
        
         | swman wrote:
         | I get that too but as I get older I start "getting it" as to
         | why people do what they do.
         | 
         | Doesn't matter who they are to me, but life is complicated and
         | ultimately it's easier to just be understanding and let go.
        
         | thih9 wrote:
         | > I would be pretty upset at my mom if she did that
         | 
         | I'm very surprised at this reaction. I feel like the right
         | approach would be to respect her right to make a personal
         | decisions.
        
           | WastingMyTime89 wrote:
           | You can both respect people right to make personal decisions
           | and think these decisions are shit and affect their
           | relationship with you negatively.
           | 
           | If my mother decided she was going to join not just a
           | religious order but one of the most strict and one of the
           | only ones preventing her to see us I would not be
           | particularly happy about her choice.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | thih9 wrote:
             | Note that GP wrote about being upset _at_ their mother,
             | this seems different from what you're describing?
             | 
             | > I would not be particularly happy about her choice.
             | 
             | This seems just being upset in general; which, I agree,
             | isn't inappropriate.
        
         | tssva wrote:
         | It sounds like you probably have a fairly healthy and loving
         | relationship with your mother. Not all family relationships are
         | that way whether at the fault of the parents, children or both.
         | I recommend not projecting your family history on to others and
         | judging them based upon it.
         | 
         | Some parents and some children don't deserve to be seen more
         | than twice in 30 years. Some children should never suffer being
         | exposed to their grandparents.
        
           | cortesoft wrote:
           | That doesn't make the story any less tragic. To have 10 kids
           | and not want to see any of them is beyond sad.
        
             | nyokodo wrote:
             | > To have 10 kids and not want to see any of them is beyond
             | sad.
             | 
             | Monastic life is a sacrifice, in part because those who
             | follow it _do_ want to see their family etc. She felt that
             | following Christ in a life of prayer separate from the
             | world was what her heart most wanted, it was what God was
             | calling her to do, and it was important for her salvation.
             | You do not understand that but any faithful Catholic child
             | would even though it is bittersweet for them too.
        
             | sizt wrote:
             | Try to remember, a mother, including yours, is just a girl
             | with her own dreams.
        
             | iammisc wrote:
             | You realize there's a whole religious backdrop to this as
             | well right? She seems like a faithful Catholic. If here
             | children are as well, then they probably see nothing wrong
             | with this. It's not about not wanting to see them, it's
             | about wanting to live your calling more. It's like the
             | Sound of Music, when Mother Superior tells Maria that
             | loving Captain Von Trapp does not mean loving God less, but
             | in reverse.
        
         | mattbee wrote:
         | because your mom might have brought you up differently if she'd
         | wanted to join a nunnery.
        
         | Baeocystin wrote:
         | I'm not torn at all. I find it reprehensible, and I am
         | genuinely surprised that more of the comments here don't find
         | that behavior horrible. There is nothing noble about having 10
         | kids, then cutting them out of your life once their other
         | parent died. I mean, wtf.
        
           | nyokodo wrote:
           | > I find it reprehensible
           | 
           | I would imagine most people wouldn't judge her if she was a
           | firefighter who died in the line of duty because she "could
           | have chosen a safer job." This is because people generally
           | appreciate this kind of sacrifice. Your attitude is based on
           | the assumption that her sacrifice wasn't worthwhile, well she
           | thought it was and Catholics think it was. Her children were
           | grown, she felt a calling from God, and ultimately it was her
           | life.
        
             | futevolei wrote:
             | I think this is the key point. My take on this situation is
             | completely colored by my anti-religious views. I view her
             | sacrifice as completely idiotic and worthless. But it's
             | clear she needed to do this. I can fake a lot of stuff for
             | some amount of time for whatever particular reason- think
             | along the lines of showing support for my wife. But I can't
             | sacrifice what she did for 3 decades without having that
             | flame deep inside.
        
             | Baeocystin wrote:
             | Firefighters actively invest in and protect their
             | communities. Her choice was in diametric opposition- the
             | complete severing of human ties outside of her own small
             | world, even of those to her children.
             | 
             | I do not think this is a noble action. Certainly some will
             | disagree with me. So be it, then we disagree.
        
           | typhonic wrote:
           | I don't know that we have enough information to judge her. I
           | mean, she was a socialite; how close was she to her children?
           | And, after all, she left each of them with nine siblings. I
           | wish I had nine lifelong friends.
        
             | ljm wrote:
             | Why do we need to judge her at all?
             | 
             | I can only sympathise with the socialite renouncing the
             | society that continues to criticise them; which in much of
             | this entire thread amounts to judging her for not
             | dedicating her entire life to motherhood.
             | 
             | Her grown-ass children will either be happy for her, or
             | they'll be mourning their loss. Or maybe a mix of both. But
             | they'll deal and life will go on.
        
             | Baeocystin wrote:
             | I'm pretty comfortable judging the act of excising all of
             | one's (ten!) children from one's life as being a shitty
             | thing to do.
             | 
             | Even other cloistered orders allow letter-writing, and
             | there are semi-cloistered orders where family can come
             | visit any time. There is nothing about the act of becoming
             | a nun that mandated her cutting of her connections to her
             | children.
        
           | watwut wrote:
           | I just cant find interpretation in which your outrage makes
           | sense. 60 years old person leaving for monastery is somehow
           | outrageous abandonment of her 30 years old offspring.
           | 
           | I dont know whether this is being edgy contrarian or sexism
           | in which women dont get to make choices for themselve. HN
           | contains plenty of those.
           | 
           | But projecting 5 years old thinking into her adult children
           | is uttery absurd. Especially since I have never seen outrage
           | over literally anyone else not being involved or leave for
           | long or risks death when his kids are small.
        
             | Baeocystin wrote:
             | Respectfully, it is neither of the presented options.
             | 
             | Something to keep in mind: _I_ am the one who posted my
             | opinion. Not the nebulous Hacker News gestalt. I, speaking
             | just for myself, find parents willfully rejecting all of
             | their children, at any age, to be ugly across the board. I
             | would say the same if it had been the husband fleeing to a
             | Monastic order, and I would say the same about (for
             | example) Jobs ' treatment of his first daughter.
             | 
             | I know we all form general ideas of how any particular
             | forum will think. Boards have moods. But if we allow
             | ourselves to see that impression as a person, of course we
             | will be annoyed at the perceived inconsistencies and
             | hypocrisies. But that is a false impression- those would
             | only hold true if it were an single individual making such
             | varied claims.
        
       | imwillofficial wrote:
       | I mean at 60, that's a ton of socialite living she got done. She
       | only gave up a retirement.
        
       | FounderBurr wrote:
       | So she gave them all her money and they kept her behind bars for
       | the rest of her life. How is this not a cult?
        
         | jollybean wrote:
         | A religion is the embodiment of spiritual principle.
         | 
         | A cult is an institution which exists to empower and enrich
         | leadership structure of the cult.
         | 
         | Given the infallibility of humans, there can be lot of
         | cultishness in religion.
         | 
         | Paradoxically, a lot of cult members are actually true
         | believers, often trying to - and doing - quite some good,
         | meaning there can in many cases be some good 'conscientious
         | externalizations' of even some otherwise crappy cults. This is
         | harder to grasp but it's real.
         | 
         | There are many otherwise secular groups that exist in this
         | sphere especially among 1) ideologically oriented groups - and
         | 2) corporations. My personal exposure to these kinds of
         | environments triggers that 'weird feeling' whenever I visit
         | such-and-such campus, in the Silicon Valley and elsewhere.
         | 
         | There are political organizations, even 'nice ones' in 'nice
         | countries' that take children, not even teens, off in isolation
         | to places like 'camps on islands' to 'teach them their values'.
         | Because of the lack of obvious religious artifacts, it doesn't
         | set of the usual triggers, but when taking a more holistic view
         | ... it seems a bit unhealthy.
         | 
         | Even more meta, it seems to me that cultures that have very
         | deep and complex behavioural patterns, idioms, norms, language
         | structure etc. exhibit a lot of the same attributes.
         | 
         | You could go so far as to point at many 'major cultures' ...
         | but to be a little less controversial, my experience with both
         | Amish and Mennonite community certainly has elements of this.
         | But I reserve judgment. It's complicated. And also they are
         | some of the most inconceivably kind people on the planet. FYI
         | they are effectively pacifists, as 'God's Children should not
         | take up arms against one another' etc. - they won't join the
         | Army.
         | 
         | Edit: from a purely secular perspective, where the notion of
         | 'there being a god or not' or where 'beliefs' etc. irrelevant
         | ... than really what is the difference between the Soviet
         | Union, for example, and a cult? They exhibit all of the same
         | artifacts. The only difference being, in some cults, there
         | might be some kind of supernatural extra beliefs to go along
         | with it. Stalin used (perverted?) a secular ideology in the
         | same way as a cult would use their own system of beliefs. 99%
         | of the resulting systematic and authoritarian externalizations
         | have nothing to do with the 'core beliefs' in both cases.
         | 
         | Edit 2: whether 'core principles' are ideological, spiritual,
         | corporatist, nationalist, or even cultural, you get a lot of
         | the same type of group dynamics forming.
        
         | anonu wrote:
         | You make it sound like she was forced to do this. There's
         | nothing in Christianity that forces you to give your money to
         | the Church or to become a nun. You do this on your own free
         | will.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | renewiltord wrote:
           | Hmm, also true of Scientology, non?
        
             | iammisc wrote:
             | A nun won't be excommunicated for leaving the convent or
             | shunned. Nor would a priest. You'd be surprised how many
             | laicized priests there are around, some of whom are even
             | married. Or how many ex-nuns there are. My principal at my
             | Catholic elementary school was an ex-nun -- incredibly
             | strict and orthodox Catholic as well. No secret was made of
             | her history. She left the convent when she didn't think it
             | was helping her. Still kept her vow of celibacy, although
             | she was technically dispensed of it, and could have married
             | if she had wanted to.
        
               | renewiltord wrote:
               | Fair enough.
        
           | trowaway7642 wrote:
           | Free will doesn't exist though. Everything is cause and
           | effect. In this case it looks like a cult and mental illness
           | made for an interesting but sad outcome.
        
             | slater wrote:
             | Thank you for your opinion.
        
               | trowaway7642 wrote:
               | Not really an opinion when science favors the assertion
               | unlike wanting to believe in an illogical fantasy.
        
               | bencollier49 wrote:
               | Science favours nothing. Positivism has failed as a
               | philosophy, and the only thing we can decide from logic
               | is that it cannot comprehensively describe the origins of
               | existence.
               | 
               | I'm sorry, but past disproving myths which most people
               | always understood were figurative (Genesis et al),
               | science is not in a place to comment on the fundamentals
               | of religion.
        
               | trowaway7642 wrote:
               | Nonsense, neuroscience favors free will being nothing
               | more than an illusion while plebs still eat up the
               | nonsensical belief for breakfast on Sundays.
        
               | bencollier49 wrote:
               | Don't fall for that. Firstly, they've defined free will
               | incorrectly, and secondly, the whole movement to deny
               | agency stems from the complete inability of anyone to
               | address the hard problem of consciousness. "We cannot
               | understand it, therefore it does not exist".
        
               | trowaway7642 wrote:
               | You basically wrote what a person that believes in God
               | argues against atheists and although I'm agnostic I still
               | find such an assertion illogical.
        
               | bencollier49 wrote:
               | I don't know which bit you're referring to. If it's the
               | hard problem, then no, we haven't cracked it, and
               | redefining the question to try to ignore it doesn't work.
               | This approach typically comes from enthusiastic
               | scientists (biologists in particular seem to be common)
               | rather than actual philosophers, and often the premises
               | were discussed and dismissed hundreds of years ago.
               | 
               | If it's the claim that you can't explain the universe
               | with logic, then we're perilously close to things like
               | Tarski's Undefinability Theorem, and that has me
               | convinced.
        
               | amanaplanacanal wrote:
               | If free will really is an illusion, then you can't help
               | believing what you do, and they can't help believing what
               | they do.
        
               | trowaway7642 wrote:
               | Of course some are predestined to be plebs for however
               | fate has it written in stone but the same argument
               | could've been made towards the earth being the center of
               | the universe. Gratefully, academics can push society
               | forward by helping the plebs get the resources to learn
               | free will is an illusion and have a healthier life with
               | that knowledge. Although still destined by
               | predeterminism.
        
               | bencollier49 wrote:
               | "Plebs" - this arrogance is also characteristic of the
               | cast of scientists who think they can do philosophy.
        
               | trowaway7642 wrote:
               | Pleb - an ordinary person, especially one from the lower
               | social classes.
               | 
               | That's generally where majority of believers in free will
               | fall into. Besides the few that came from such families
               | and got out of that lifestyle. Anyhow I believe you wrote
               | arrogance unfairly when it's simply honesty. Sure, a few
               | great compatibilist exist in philosophy but their
               | definition of free will is nothing of the sort like what
               | the plebs believe.
        
               | jazzyjackson wrote:
               | When you think someone else is crazy, consider that you
               | may be misinterpreting what they're saying. Religion is a
               | different language, it doesn't map on to your demand for
               | logical reason.
        
               | trowaway7642 wrote:
               | Mental illness doesn't equate to crazy if that's what
               | you're replying towards my previous comment mentioning
               | mental illness.
               | 
               | Although I see a world that just boils down to cause &
               | effect, I find nothing wrong with people desiring to
               | believe in spiritual deities but being part of a religion
               | is where I speculate a lot of unhealthy behavior grows
               | and has undeniably harmed a lot of lgbtq+ children. I
               | would rather associate with a group of people that prefer
               | logic & reason any day over persons that prefer faith
               | because I've noticed in my life that persons that prefer
               | faith have desires to control others without much concern
               | towards the persons they control not wishing to be
               | treated in such a manner.
               | 
               | I grew up in a catholic family and I wouldn't be
               | surprised if the hell they fear isn't deserved for their
               | controlling tendencies that religion encourages.
        
           | Thorrez wrote:
           | >There's nothing in Christianity that forces you to give your
           | money to the Church
           | 
           | There's a wide variety of Christian churches. Some can be
           | aggressive in asking for money. Most of them do promote
           | donation of some of your money to them. The percentage
           | varies. Some say 10% (tithe), some say whatever you feel is
           | best, some might say all. I don't think the Catholic Church
           | is very aggressive, nor does it say members should give it
           | all their money.
        
         | Thorrez wrote:
         | >So she gave them all her money
         | 
         | Do you have a source for this? I don't see it in the article.
         | 
         | >and it was then she began the long, considered bid to join one
         | of the strictest orders of nuns in the world.
         | 
         | It sounds like it was hard for her to get in, and the group is
         | fairly exclusive. I think cults try to get people to join by
         | making it easy to join.
        
           | Spooky23 wrote:
           | Usually when you join a religious order that requires a vow
           | of poverty, your stuff goes to to the order. A carmelite nun
           | or Franciscan friar would be examples of that.
           | 
           | I have a friend who was a nun in an order like that who chose
           | to leave because she inherited her parent's house, and felt
           | strongly about maintaining the gardens to their (very high)
           | standards.
        
             | Thorrez wrote:
             | >Usually when you join a religious order that requires a
             | vow of poverty, your stuff goes to to the order.
             | 
             | Do you have a source for this? I know that a vow of poverty
             | means you have to give up everything, such as your friend's
             | house. But I doubt that it has to be given to the order.
             | Also there might be a distinction between things you give
             | away before joining (what I think this thread is about) and
             | things you gain while a nun (such as inherited stuff) that
             | you have to give away.
             | 
             | > I think you can give them to your family. [1]
             | 
             | > When you make final vows, you can give away your
             | possessions (e.g. to family/friends) or donate them to the
             | order. [2]
             | 
             | > Possessions can usually be given to family or friends or
             | sold and donated either to the order or a charity of
             | choice. In the case of inheritance, you can either ask to
             | be left out of the will or accept it and then turn it over
             | to the order or gift it to another. [3]
             | 
             | [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/comments/9zaegz/cu
             | rious...
             | 
             | [2] https://www.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/comments/grtzu1/ad
             | vice_...
             | 
             | [3] https://www.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/comments/grtzu1/ad
             | vice_...
        
           | renewiltord wrote:
           | > Five years later she gave away everything she owned to join
           | the Sisters of Our Lady of Mount Carmel in Des Plaines,
           | Illinois.
           | 
           | The source is the linked BBC article
        
             | treyfitty wrote:
             | That doesn't mean she gave it to the church. I interpreted
             | that statement as "she gave away everything [to her
             | children]
        
               | renewiltord wrote:
               | Hmm, fair enough. In fact, it appears from
               | https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-
               | xpm-1994-10-29-me-56060-... that she gave to her children
               | what they desired and then auctioned the rest to charity
               | (one can imagine that wasn't necessarily this church).
        
           | tshaddox wrote:
           | There is no shortage of cults that establish a hierarchy with
           | different levels of exclusivity.
        
             | Thorrez wrote:
             | I'm wondering what the hierarchy like that is here. There
             | seem to just be 2 levels here: lay Catholic and Carmelite
             | nun. Would the entire Catholic Church be a cult? It doesn't
             | have the "gave them all her money" or "kept her behind
             | bars" aspects that FounderBurr mentioned.
        
         | iammisc wrote:
         | > So she gave them all her money and they kept her behind bars
         | for the rest of her life. How is this not a cult?
         | 
         | Because she could leave if she wanted to? Nuns leave somewhat
         | frequently (so do priests). No one is stopping them.
         | 
         | The idea of giving all your stuff away to follow God is
         | something people choose willingly.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | ekianjo wrote:
         | > they kept her behind bars for the rest of her life
         | 
         | You are assuming she had no choice to leave.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | draw_down wrote:
         | Well, what's a cult? A cult is a group you don't like.
        
       | dctoedt wrote:
       | I feel a little bit sorry for the woman's kids and grandkids,
       | because having nearby grandparents, and specifically
       | grandmothers, in your life seems to confer certain advantages in
       | natural selection. [0]
       | 
       | Just this morning my wife and I were talking, almost excitedly,
       | about what our last "job" will be: Helping to raise our
       | grandkids, if and when we have any (in the not-too-distant
       | future, perhaps).
       | 
       | - In the grandkids' infancy: Doing lots of playing, talking,
       | laughing, reading to them, and other interaction with the little
       | buggers, to help their brains develop.
       | 
       | - From their births onward: Being sources of patient, calm,
       | unqualified love, taking delight in their mere existence (but
       | always deferring to their parents). Giving their parents a break
       | in childcare duties from time to time.
       | 
       | And of course your own kids are your kids forever. My parents and
       | in-laws are long gone, yet even now I sometimes catch myself
       | thinking, _hmm, I should ask Mom and Dad about that_. My wife has
       | said much the same thing. We both want to be around for our own
       | kids for as long as we 're able and not a burden.
       | 
       | We're both _really_ looking forward to being grandparents. It
       | gives us a(nother) reason to continue eating right and getting
       | lots of exercise to stay in shape: We want to be physically up to
       | the task for as long as we can manage it.
       | 
       | [0]
       | https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2019/02/07/6920883...
        
       | premium-komodo wrote:
       | From what I understand, the Carmelites differ from some other
       | Christians because they do long contemplations. I often wonder if
       | their contemplations are basically the same thing as my
       | (Buddhist) meditation. I suspect they are, but that we just have
       | different metaphors about what's happening. Anyone interested in
       | this possible overlap between Christianity and Buddhism might
       | check out the videos of John Butler, an English man who has
       | contemplated/meditated for decades.
        
       | DavidPeiffer wrote:
       | Here's a similar, more recent story about a banker turned nun.
       | Good listen if you have some time.
       | 
       | https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/deathsexmoney/episodes/...
        
         | user3939382 wrote:
         | The Jesuit Guide to Almost Everything by James Martin is
         | autobiographical and tells about his experience going from a
         | Wharton MBA, accountant at GE making a lot of money to becoming
         | a priest; sitting in a hot room in Haiti with bugs inside to
         | take care of the sick and poor.
         | 
         | It really hit home with me because it was my dream to get a
         | Wharton MBA. Then he says his balance would be higher at the
         | ATM every week but it felt very meaningless. There's also an
         | interesting side story about the psychopaths (my word) in
         | management at GE.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-06-13 23:02 UTC)