The New Zealand Tablet THURSDAY, JUNE 3, 1909. MORE ABOUT ' ESCAPED ' NUNS

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XXXVII, Issue 22, 3 June 1909, Page 861

The New Zealand Tablet THURSDAY, JUNE 3, 1909. MORE ABOUT ' ESCAPED ' NUNS

HE doors of honest misunderstanding are as . many and as various- as the doors, of death. And by one of them a candid and fair-minded non-Catholic reader has, all unconsciously, stepped into a misconception of an editorial article which appeared in our issue of April 29. The article in question dealt with the East Bergholt (England) convent incident, which sundry secular newspapers worked up into a ' silly-season ' romance and ' pennydreadful ' sensation. 'On February 28,' we said, 'we find Lloyd's Weekly cracking its cheeks with blasts of sensationalism about a "flight" from a con vent,* for which the nun had planned and " waited for two years," a»hue-and-cry and "pursuit," a "struggle at the station,' " pathetic cries," a successful " escape," and — " safe home" !' It was, as- we pointed out, over again the story of the ' escaped ' nun as told 'by impostors of the Mrs. Slattery brand ' — at ' front seats one shilling, back seats sixpence.' In certain of the hinterlands of thought there is a demand for th"at sort of fiction. And the demand is mci by a supply^ which, however, the course of education is every decade rendering more fitful and uncertain. It is this demand which creates the convents that are prisons, where the pining inmates are restrained by padlocked ' cells ' and high walla, whence a few intolerably beautiful ones escape only by lucky dashes for liberty, or by the aid of noble-hearted ' rescuers ' with rope-ladders or balloons. And, as in other fiction-stories, all usually ends - with the clangor of the wedding bells — ' Hear the mellow wedding bells 1 Golden bells!'

It was with the prison-cell and physical-restraint phase of the escaped ' nun romance that we dealt specially in our issue of April 29. Other view-points of the subject were touched upon only in a purely incidental and subsidiary way. Our article moved our candid non-Catholic reader to make the following comment, which an esteemed friend sends to us for explanation : ' I am more disappointed than I can tell that, while Father Cleary takes the position that there is nothing in the code of religious institutions to restrain for a single second, the spirit of the Church is to restrain until certain forms entailing compulsory delay have been complied with. Thus the code, of religious institutions is opposed to the spirit of the Church.' And, farther: 'The Church has not opposed instant egress— instant egress is opposed to the spirit of the Church, and therefore considered by the Church to be wrong.' The difficulty to which our friend gives expression above arises from confusing two things that are really separate and distinct. One of these is the fabled and non-existent physical restraint and enforced imprisonment of nuns, which formed the subject of our article of April 29. The other is the forms by which religious may be released, by competent authority, from their vows, so that they may return to worldly life and worldly pursuits with propriety and with the sanction and approval of the Church. This latter subject was touched upon by us only in a passing and incidental way. To understand it, the reader must take two chief things into consideration : (1) The nature of the obligations freely undertaken by a nun when entering tipon her religious profession; and (2) the manner in which she may be released by competent authority from such obligations. Stated in the briefest and most summary terms, the religious, on her profession, commonly vows, for God's greater glory, to serve Him in poverty, chastity, and obedience, according to the constitution and rules of the religious order or religious ' congregation' which she enters. (We will hereafter use the word ' order ' in its wider and popular meaning, to iuclude both religious orders strictly so called and modern religious ' congregations.') This triple obligation is assumed with the most perfect freedom. It is, moreover, assumed only at the request of the applicant} and after Jong consideration and probation and close study and practice of the rules — first as postulant and next (usually for some two or more years) as novice. By these vows tho nun (the name is here applied to sisterhoods generally) deliberately assumes two chief classes of obligations special to her state: (a) obligations towards God, and (b) obligations towards her order and her sisters in religion. These latter obligations are of the- nature of a bilateral contract — binding the new sister, on the one part, to certain duties towards the order, and, on the other part, binding the order to the care and support of the sister. And this mutual compact is commonly signed by both parties and witnessed and ratified by the ecclesiastical authority who, in the name of the Church, receives the vows of the newly professed religious. It will be tlms seen, even at this stage, that a sacred compact of this kind freely entered upon for a holy purpose, is not to be lighbly thrown to the winds at the mere whim or caprice of one of the parties to it, even though there exists the fullest physical and civilly legal liberty to tear it to tatters and trample it upon foot at any time, for any cause or for none at all. s But that is not all. Vows have a divine origin and sanction. Vows, as acts of religion, were taken from the earliest times. They are referred to in at least eightyfour passages in the Old Testament. In the New Testament St. Paul is recorded as having a vow (Acts xviii., 18), and four other men are stated to ' have a vow on them ' (Acts xxi., 23). These, and the other vows under consideration here, are free, deliberate acts of renunciation made to God, for the sake of some higher good, by those who (by age and otherwise) are capable of contracting a solemn obligation. The thing which is thus surrendered is, it may be added, not one that is essential to happiness or usefulness. As acts of religion and of worship, vows, such as we are contemplating here, fall within the spiritual domain, are in the keeping of the Church, and are subject to her control. It is the right and duty of the Church to see to the due performance of sacred obligations thus freely contracted towards God by persons carrying out her works of charity and religion in orders and ' congregations ' established by her for these ends. Even divorce-approving legislators in America and Australasia do not allow disgruntled _ wedded couples to deal with the marriage bond as their passion or caprice may suggest. They flail legal bigamy with whips and scorpions. Still less can the Church of Christ allow her children to play fast and loose with the Almighty, and to treat pledged

vows to Him with levity, caprice, or contumely, as the interest or the passion of the moment may suggest. The mere physical freedom to cheat or steal or give your neighbor a black eye does not entitle you, either legally or morally, tq do these things. Convents are not prisons, nor are mother-superiors head gaolers. Every sister Is physically free to march out by the front door of the-con-vent if she so choose — she has no need to plot and plan ' escapes ' or to await tall and noble-hearted ' rescuers ' with fiery eyes and strong arms and rope-ladders and all *he rest of the ' flummery ' of the tinselled melodrama of the Orange-lodge and the Protestant-Alliance. But, as in the case of theft, this physical freedom to run away from solemn obligations freely contracted towards God and towards others, does not necessarily imply the moral right to do so. Even the civil law place's a serious discount upon the exercise of the physical freedom to abandon legal duties and obligations. ' The butt-end iv the law ' falls with a dull, sickening thud, for instance, upon the housefather who deserts his offspring. It likewise provides penalties for the contractor who uses his physical freedom to ' escape ' from finishing the well which he has engaged to dig, or the house or bridge or dock which he has engaged to build. The cook or scullery-maid who quits without notice has likewise to face the peril of the law in tba shape of imprisonment or fine. The military code will not allow our volunteers to exercise their physical liberty to throw aside their obligations at any moment that their fancy or caprice or convenience may suggest. When Mr. Thomas Atkins (who is likewise a volunteer) does so, he is treated as a deserter. And if he ' escapes ' from tho ranks ' in the face of the enemy,' he is, when caught again, planted up against the most convenient wall, and a platoon of his comrades-in-arms pound his coward heart into mincemeat with rifle-bullets travelling at extremely high velocity. All of which is here set down to show that the consensus of human opinion, as reflected in both civil and military law, will not tolerate people lightly setting aside obligations freely entered upon, even when such obligations are of the purely natural order. The social fabric would totter and fall if caprice or fancy or passion or momentary convenience or self-interest were the sole arbiters of right and duty and social obligation. * There are, however, in the civil law, forms of release from sundry contractual obligations that become irksome. The cook and the scullery-maid and the contractor have their way out; so has the partner who wishes to leave a firm; so has the manager who desires to leave his employment. But in every such case, legal release from v legal obligation does not come by merely running away. There are forms to be gone through. Such forms usually vary in length or brevity, in simplicity or in complication, according to the nature of the interests involved. All this necessitates some measure of delay. And such delay may extend from minutes in the case of the maid to weeks and months in the case of a dissolution of some partnerships. It is hardly to be expected that less care would be devoted by the Church to the sacred and manifold obligations arising from a nun's triple-vow than the civil law and social usage demand in the case of rights and duties connected with purely natural contracts. Here, again, mere running away does not give release from sacred obligations freely and formally and deliberately contracted, in the face of the Church, towards God and towards follow-creatures. The Church's law, like the civil law, provides in the case of the nun, forms of release from these vows — which vows (as stated) are, as great acts of religion and worship, under the control of the Church, as the appointed representative of God on earth. The vow to serve God and His poor or His little ones, in poverty, chastity, and obedience, is not to be set asido by a scamper across country, or with less thought and form and care than the law requires for release from a verbal promise to wash dinner-plates and sweep a kitchen floor-. The Church has to consider, in these matters, the rights of- God, and the rights and interests of the individual soul and of the community. Where there is a serious desire, on the part of the nun — and not a mere passing whim or faney — to secure release from the obligations of her vow, the competent ecclesiastical authority affords every -facility for such release. And no religious comimmity wishes to retain- within it an unwilling member who has mistaken or lost her vocation, or who has, for any cause, determined that her place and calling are elsewhere. In all such cases the Church and religious communities are kinder and wore considerate and indulgent than is the civil law in the case of grave contractual obligations. An application for release is forwarded to tbo proper quarter, the legal claims (if any) of the sister upon the community are adjusted, and the desired relief is granted in due course. These things are not done 'in the snapping of a gun.' Nor is it proper or desirable

that the tremendous obligations of vows to God should be thus lightly set aside. The Church does not permit the novice to make vows in haste, or otherwise than as the result of years of long-drawn and prayerful preparation. Nor does she wish them to be set aside capriciously or with indecent precipitation. That would be an act of contumely against high heaven. The Church does not impose force or physical restraint upon nuns. But in the grave matter of release from vows, as in all things else, she N-ishes everything to be done decently and in order. «