Founding of the SND

Founding of the SND by Sr. Julie and Sr. Francois

Our reading for this week was about the founding of the Sisters of Notre Dame. The

spirituality of the SND expressed itself in respect for the entire community,
providing education to the needy, and commitment with the world through social justice.
The two founders were Sister Julie Billiart and Francoise Blin de Bourdon, who could
not be more different from each other. While Julie grew up as a member of the
impoverished third estate, Francoise grew up in aristocracy. Julie spent her 20
and 30s bedridden, while Francoise spent her early life attending lavish parties

held by the king.

For this post, I wanted to really dive into the social issues of the sisters’ day. The

beginning of the reading describes the atmosphere of the pre-revolutionary era.

Those who attempted to change the system and make it more equitable were seen

as traitors. For example, both Turgot and Silhouette, who initiated tax reforms, were

removed from their posts. It pains me to imagine the lack of security their families

must have felt, and the pain of the majority community for the loss of their voice.

These acts infringe on the human rights of the people and should not be tolerated.

There are some parallels that we can look at between the world Sr. Julie and Sr.

Francois lived in and our world. The reading continuously mentions how the wealth

was concentrated in the top 2%, with the rest of the 98% living in poverty. This is not

dissimilar to what we are experiencing now around the world. We often hear about how our

wealth is concentrated in the top 1%, and that about tens of millions of people in America

alone are living in poverty. This has been a problem for a while but there is little
progress made towards ending it. Why?

The answer to that can also be found within the passage: the social sin. This is the

first time I’ve heard a name for it, but this is a common sin. In the reading, the social

sin is described as “a relationship built upon unfairness that the individuals involved

did not create but from which they nevertheless benefitted”. This is important because

those who commit the social sin allow the problems to continue. This is a common

issue, and most are guilty of a social sin towards any community: towards the Native

Americans at the beginning of the modern era, towards the slaves in the 1800s,

towards the women, minorities, and other underprivileged groups who joined in the

civil rights movement in the 1900s, towards the impoverished people of today.

Most are guilty of the social sin. Some are because they don’t know about the problem,

but they probably know. The thing is that, even if people know, they either don’t know

what to do or feel like they can’t do anything about it. What can one person do? We

usually think this. But I think that social upheaval starts from grassroots movements.

Lasting change can only happen if the change starts locally and internally from the

masses, not imposed by a government mandate. For me, tihs logically makes sense,

although I don't have hard facts and statistics to currently support my argument

(maybe I'll update this later and add some). I’m a believer in restorative justice. But for

this to happen, we need to hear everyone’s story and find out what each person really

needs. And we need to hear it to spur us into action. We need to talk amongst ourselves

and that’s how we start to plan for change. Talking raises awareness and allows us to

see the problem from different perspectives; this is crucial for arriving at effective

solutions. I never really considered myself a social justice warrior. I’ve been thinking

of that term recently and wondering why it has a negative connotation. It sounds pretty

noble to me. Maybe what I’ve said here makes me one. I don’t mind.

Thank you for reading and have a wonderful day! :)