Talk:Chimay Abbey

I recomend that the term "nunnery" be replaced with "convent". Nunnery has negative connotations as it was once slang for a brothel. --Kjrjr (talk) 19:29, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Is this a joke?I don't see the word "nunnery" in this article. But even if it were there, how many, if any, contemporary native English speakers, on hearing the word "nunnery", think first, or at all, of the Elizabethan slang meaning? The primary meaning, now as formerly, is "a monastic house for nuns", whereas "convent" just means any religious community. It continues to be useful in that sense and I don't agree with you that there is any case for replacing it individually or wholesale with the less specific word "convent".

A direct comparison is "queen": this is modern, not obsolete, slang for "homosexual", but no-one (in their right mind) would ever propose that for that reason it should not be used in its original meaning of "female monarch". HeartofaDog (talk) 21:40, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

No it is not a joke, and to my knowledge I am in my right mind. Apparently Chimay Abbey and Scourmont Abbey share the same discussion page. The particular word is used in the Chimay Abbey article. I have worked in and arround the Roman Catholic Church for over 20 years and hold a MA from a Pontifical Institution, and in my experience, the word "nunnery" is never used in any way other than satirically. Generally the terms Abbey, Priory, Monastery are used to refer to foundations of both men and women. When it is desired to identify the house as being specifically for women, the word convent is used. I should point out, that I have also seen convent used to describe certain houses of religious men particularly Carmelites. In fairness, I would also point out that my experience is limited to the United States. --Kjrjr (talk) 14:32, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

"Nunnery" is used throughout Wikipedia in articles on women's religious houses (and not entirely by me). My dictionaries mention the slang meaning of "brothel" as Shakespearean, etc, but there's no indication that that sense has taken over so totally that the word has ceased to be available in the original and useful sense "a house of nuns". There might be a transatlantic difference, or it may be a sort of in-joke in studenty religious circles. It may well be indeed that modern nuns themselves don't like the term, but if the word still means what it did, it can be used that way regardless.

I think the onus is on you to provide some evidence beyond your own feeling that the original meaning of the word is so generally devalued that it can't be used that way any more. HeartofaDog (talk) 20:39, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

The fact that Nunnery is used throughout wikipedia is no proof that it is an appropriate term. As to my "feelings" as I stated befor I am not without expertise in this area and in my professional life I have never encountered an order of Roman Catholic women who refer to their houses as "nunneries". Beyond any pejoritive implications the term is archaic and outdated. Even the house of Cistercian women in question do not refer to themselves as a nunnery but rather as an Abbey. If you do a quick "google" search of the word, you will find many references to old ruins, bed and breakfasts and even foundations of Budist women, but not one current Roman Catholic community that still uses the term. I feel now that even convent would not be correct, perhaps "Trappist Nuns" would make a better header. Here is an option:

Trappist Nuns

In 1919 a Trappist foundation of nuns, Chimay Abbey or Our Lady of Peace Abbey (Abbaye de Notre-Dame de la Paix de Chimay) was established here, the successor to the Cistercian community of Gomerfontaine (1207-1792), re-established in 1802 at Saint-Paul-aux-Bois. The community became Trappist in 1878. It was exiled to Fourbechies in 1904, before coming to Chimay after the war under the protection of the Trappist monastery, Scourmont Abbey, established at Scourmont in Chimay in 1850. This abbey has become famous as one of the six Trappist breweries of Belgium, its products being marketed as Chimay beer.--Kjrjr (talk) 18:46, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I need to explain something to you, as a very new editor on Wikipedia. That is that your claims to qualifications or experience cut no ice, because anyone can claim to be anything. For that reason it is necessary, if proposing a contested change - and your change here is contested, believe me - to provide evidence, in the form of verifiable sources, that it is justified. My own experience and knowledge of the English language don't agree with what you are saying, nor do the dictionaries that I've checked - so why would I take your word for it?

"The fact that Nunnery is used throughout wikipedia is no proof that it is an appropriate term." Agreed, it is not - but it does indicate that no-one else has had a problem with it.

Google shows plainly that the word "nunnery" continues to be current in the UK for "house of nuns", without any overtones - even if not by the nuns themselves for their present communities. (The difference may well be that the word continues in use for buildings but not for active communities - as this article is as much about the building as the inhabitants, that would make it entirely appropriate here). So I am not inclined to let a useful word be censored for no good reason. HeartofaDog (talk) 00:24, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

You need explain nothing to me either as a new editor or not. I have not edited the article outright but have begun a discussion, I mentioned my qualifications as an explanation where my opinion comes from. I am not concerned as to rather it "cuts ice" with you or not; I merely wish for articles about Roman Catholicism to be correct and accurate.

I checked the use of nunnery on wikipedia and noticed that I was automatically redirected to the entry for Abbey; within which the word is not used at all. I have given you numerous examples of how the term is outdated and unused in the context of Roman Catholic houses of women. Are you the original author of the article? If so, I am not doubting your scholorship only that you have used an archaic and possibly offensive term to describe the foundation. If your knowledge of the English language doesn't square with mine thats fine, but a quick check of some sources will show the term is not used by the people to whom you have attributed it. I have no doubt that you found web based dictionary services which list the word simply as a "house of nuns" but did you find any actual "houses of nuns" who used the term to describe themselves either in the UK or out of it? If you choose belive me a liar about my background and education, I suppose I can do nothing about that but call a local convent and ask them if they ever refer to their house as a nunnery. I may have spent my time working in and for the Catholic Church specifically within the U.S., but I have encountered women religious from all over the world including the U.K. and Ireland and I have never seen the word nunnery used to describe either their foundations or their actual house.

If this still will not let you see my point consider that the actual Abbey you were writing about doesn't call itself a nunnery but rather an Abbey. Its not even accurate in the context in which you are using it. --Kjrjr (talk) 02:40, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I am not at all calling you a liar and I am sorry for making the point clumsily. I am however pointing out that on the internet anyone can claim to be an expert in any field, and particularly so on Wikipedia, so asserting your qualifications, however genuine, as any kind of authority, is entirely pointless because the claims are not verifiable.

If you look back at what you have written, your only argument is that I must believe you on this word because you have x qualifications and y experience - "respect my authoritah"! This is no more than your opinion against mine, and what you say is counter to my own experience, which of course I will believe over yours: I use the word regularly without any sense of it being either archaic or offensive and if you look again at the Google results, you will see that a very large number of academically impeccable British websites do the same, eg, http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/ and http://www.british-history.ac.uk/ , not to mention scholars within the Catholic church itself - eg, http://www.osb.org/cist/intro.html (dated 1995, so this is scarcely an archaic use)

As for abbey vs nunnery, they are saying different things: the axis "abbey-priory" is not the same as "monastery-nunnery-convent" - I simply have not the energy to go into this, and must leave it to you to work out the difference. But you are unlikely to do so from what is on Wikipedia: you are absolutely right to point out the unusually low quality of religious articles - again I must leave it to you to consider the reasons for that.

It's time to wind this up. The difference is clearly that in the UK - where we have a lot of old buildings that were once nunneries - the word is still common without any sense of offence or humour, to refer to those buildings, mostly in an historical context. So the clash seems to come down to UK use versus US use. There is a Wikipedic convention, because this is such a common situation, that the first editor of an article sets its "brand" of English (see WP:ENGVAR), and I am obviously a UK editor, so on that basis I would say we should keep the word.

However, although you are not quite right to say that NO current Catholic community uses the word nunnery, I could not find any Anglophone ones that did so. I am not a Catholic, and I don't actually know any nuns, so given the lack of websites of current nuns' communities using "nunnery" I am prepared to accept that the word "nunnery" is out of favour with real live nuns, and that the usual modern word is "convent".

1. So in this article I would not object to "Trappist convent" in place of "Trappist nunnery" and have edited accordingly.
2. But I would object very strongly to any attempt to replace "nunnery" wholesale in articles relating to buildings of communities no longer extant, where the word "nunnery" is still standard in UK English and has a useful meaning.

This discussion of course binds no other editor to anything...

can you agree that? HeartofaDog (talk) 16:49, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I would whole heartedly agree that the word should not be replaced when it refers to an historical building or a no longer extant community. However, I reject that I have only used my authority as an argument. I pointed out ways you could verify what I was saying as it appears you did. I only mentioned my background as a foundation for my opinion. I have ejoyed our discourse. Thank you.--Kjrjr (talk) 18:59, 7 May 2008 (UTC)