There were significant realities in meeting the discipline of Religious Formation with the Religious Congregation of the Carmelite Sisters of the Most Sacred Heart of Los Angeles from the years 1996 to 2003.
In the year 2000, I completed three years of initial religious formation and was approved to make temporary profession for a yearly pronouncement of adherence to the Rule of Life of the Congregation of the Carmelite Sisters of the Most Sacred Heart of Los Angeles through the Evangelical Counsels of Obedience, Chastity and Poverty. This was a profession of one year and resumed for continued discernment with a yearly assessment on the complete reality of seeing this towards Final Profession for the next six years. Each year from this point was an assignment to live with the older Final Professed community members to begin a reality of meeting the Rule of Life with women who were in the community celebrating up to 50 years of Religious Life.
This was a serious reality of learning about this congregation away from beginners in this Rule of Life. I highly regarded their condition of finality in this vocation to the Order of Carmel. This was ascertained in the arrangements of care towards buriel for their retired elderly intimately shared with me as a new member of their community. The care of a religious family witnessed a Gospel embrace and obligation for the elderly and a preparation for the young and new members.
I was at a decision of meeting this religious community with the same Gospel charity and embrace. What delivered a continued discernment was a family circumstance of unsettled communication and meetings that caused a question to my yearly renewal of these Evangelical Counsels of this Rule of Life. This was the dialogue from my parents and grandmother family visits that caused a distress for me and a sudden question of my safety in connection to my siblings' behavior and conduct during these visits and unpronounced visits. There were also evident realities of being withheld information being communicated to me by my superiors. It delivered a proportion of seeing this not following through with a protocal of open relationship with me as a young sister entrusting myself to their direction. I began to find them inconsiderate and contradicting the trust and confidence in their maturity in decisions for me.
It was serious that the discourse could not find a protocal of open communication and a form of secrecy and immaturity came from the Superior and her conduct that made the discourse difficult for me as a young person to find communicated at a level of meeting me seriously after six years of living with them in community. I requested to renew my fourth year of Evangelical Counsels and I was advised to write a letter to disregard this request with no real decree of reason except the concluded reality of council members not encouraging the renewal. These council members included my present superior who was living with me in community at the Sts. Felicitas and Perpetua convent. The conduct of this superior was not at a conducive openness in my formation as I received in the novitiate and it was evident decisions were being made over my person without proper discourse of respectable reason for my knowledge in matters connected to my person as a member of this community. Signatures were suddenly required of me for my employment with the school as Religion Coordinator and no proper discourse was instructed for my knowledge on the matter. It was rude of them to request me to sign a serious document that involved a form of compensation and money with my name and signature. The request did not perform a serious condition on formation towards community life in the distribution of this allocated commission with my contribution beyond the signature. My services rendered became an asset uncomplimented by this superior who was a financial advisor in the assets of the community and it became evident to me she found this her role as a superior conducive to this position over me.
Religious formation delivers a resourcefulness of committing a dialogue of instruction to the new member of the congregation. This should include a resourcefulness on formation in how an adjoining asset from this new member contributes to community life. This superior overtook me in a manner that oversaw my position as under her and did not include me in these decisions and demanded my signature with no respectful decree of meeting my person as a serious decision for these community standards of intention for resourcefulness I provided in service to the community.
Meryl Viola Bravo, M.A.
