New Vatican leader 'positive on women' in a classic clerical culture way

Dear Rhetts Heir: Surely you jest: "Surely, no reasonable Catholic would hold to that biblicist prohibition of women having authority over men, would they? Would they?"

Here is a direct quote from Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger in his 2004 "Letter...on the collaboration of men and women in the church and in the world". Note please that he entitles his letter -"...in the church and in the world": "God's DECISIVE (caps mine)words to the woman after the first sin express the kind of relationship which has now been introduced between man and woman: "your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you" (Gn.3:16)". "The woman", how derisive, condescending, cold and telling.

This is the "curial marching orders" Tobin has bought into and which he brings to his new role.

Good question, but I'd go further. Not only does Tobin's job not require ordination, but quite honestly, why do we need all the bishops we have? What are bishops for?

Yes, we need them to ordain priests, but they don't do a lot of that these days. They do a whole stack of admin, but they don't need to be ordained to do that. They aren't needed to "confirm" folks these days, as one's parish priest can do that. They are supposed to be teachers par excellence, but in these days of internet and satellite communication, the topmost rank of the hierarchy is with us all the time, to elucidate and to rule, to define and to condemn.

Frankly, most of them are just anachronisms, surplus to requirements. Somewhere like Great Britain, for instance, would manage very well with just three. That would allow one to be indisposed, one to work (ordaining priests) and one to be on holiday. Ample.

They could have very fulfilling lives being run-of -the-mill parish priests again, and their re-newed role would not need an attendant cloud of Bishops' chaplains, Monsignori, Knights of This and That - all now freed for really useful tasks.

I would like to inform the Pope that the results of. ADAM and Eve (seeing themselves naked and being banished from the garden DID NOT HAPPEN AFTER EVE'S PART (which if it were her fault the punishment would have started then and Adam would not have suffered Eve's fate (marriage does include shaving of bodies but not individual sins) BUT Adam on his own sinned AND THEN the punishment began.
So what is wrong with this reasoning? Tell me. (Who believes that story in the first place?)
The church will find any excuse to practice misogyny
Am open to all replies. jokelly

No, he's more like a dose of Pepto-Bismol...he'll coat the situation for a while before it re-emerges just the same.

He sounds pretty condescending to women, too.

After reading him for a while now, I've come to the conclusion that his articles aren't meant to be taken seriously. He uses snide remarks and anger much the same way vulgar comedians do. Its all an act...its not funny or enlightening, but an act nonetheless.

There is no poisoning of minds here. He is a trained professor in opening minds to the truth. Shrewd enough to understand the white lies of clericalism. What is amazing is this good professor makes no attempt to excuse the clerics he left behind. Many ex priests are afraid of hurting the feelings of the clerical culture where they still have friends. I am sure Prof. Kennedy still has friends priests and he is not afraid to call a spade a spade. Bravo. There is no cynicism here, just wisdom. And I am sure he passed that wisdom on to his students.

Translation: How many minds has he exposed to the truth and the light?

Professor Kennedy writes from decades of real world experience during which time he has endured and survived much hostility coming from those who proclaim themselves agents of the infallible church. I find his writings reflect that ordeal, as well they should. What's more I am grateful that my own judgment and knowledge have the benefit of his perspective, without which my mind would still be festering from the poisons placed there by the decadent clerical culture.

Tess you might be missing the main point. That is the extent of Fr Tobin's experience with women is hierarchical in nature. That is kooking up to them as a child and assuming they look up to him as a priest. Relating to women as equals in a relationship gets lost in this dynamic. It's one of the unexamined relational assumptions that descent clerics operate under, but it's never the less really debillitating for them when women won't or don't operate under those same assumptions.

I suspect the underlying reason for the LCWR investigation is that these religious women truly see themselves as equal humanity to clerical males and relate to them as such. That will never fly with the assumptions about women, especially religious women, that the world view of the clerical system is built on.

Tess, Tess, why so harsh? Where's the poison? All he did was to explain the evident. Priests don't know women but attempt to rule them (and that's the truth). How embarrassed poor Mother Millea must be. Why didn't she get the job?
She now knows these valiant women--why not put her knowledge to work. I expect that you, Tess, could do a better job than a man.

Peace

Well, he taught me when I was a college student in the late 60s. He did not poison my mind, he helped me learn to USE it. His students held him in very high regard. But even then he ruffled feathers of those in high places. As was the tradition at the small Midwestern Catholic college, we voted to have him be the speaker at our 1969 graduation. Nope. Was vetoed. Not on your life. They knew they had little control over him. So we all assembled very early in the morning, broke bread, and he spoke to us down in the catacombs (literally) of the college. Nobody asked permission; we just did it. Later in the day we had the usual folderol commencement that was nice enough, family members liked it. We celebrated in that way. Then we dispersed to the 4 winds. But it is interesting that we have had a reunion EVERY five years since then. We gather for a weekend, brings wives and partners, share stories and liturgy, and recall a time and place that left a mark on us to this day. I do not think anyone feels like "Mr. Kennedy" poisoned our minds. But if he indeed did, we keep sipping from the cup and finding a way to make what he taught us real here in the next century!

Dear Jim, I certainly agree with your final conclusion re the sin of clerical culture. At the same time I agree with Professor Kennedy that this appointment is only a glimmer of hope. I also agree with John Allen who intimated one reason for this appointment is a PR move designed to lessen the rancor (around the world) regarding these two "investigations."

Does anyone remember the unrealistic (global) euphoria immediately following the election of Barack Obama to the Presidency? What is the situation today after he and his administration have dealt with the political/sociological culture in the USA? We sometimes talk about the "Power of One" as if it's magical. We live in a real world and it's one of hard knocks. President Obama wasn't/isn't a messiah/savior and neither is Fr. Tobin, even if he's entirely able to shake off the clerical/hierarchical culture that shaped/shapes him.
Thank God for the Holy Spirit who breathes over chaos....

It's not papal culture---it's clerical culture. Tobin is a member of the club before he is anything else. And he is
quite condescending in an admittedly genial way, but don't be fooled. I wouldn't want a bridge to these people in
Rome.

I'm sorry to say that Mr. Kennedy's caustic sarcasm and ex-priest anti-clericalism, in my view, puts him in the same camp as Rush Limbaugh and Mother Angelica: clever sarcastic commentators who wear down an already worn down church and world. I fail to see how their tone builds up the church. We Christians may differ in the "what" of our faith but we should never veer from the "how": mutual respect and charity. And it's featuring such sarcastic "sages" as Kennedy that makes NCR a little less catholic. Hang in there, John Allen!

"The sin of the papal culture today is its refusal to accept the reforms advanced by Vatican II. That is a scandal that must be addressed."

Yes, and the sin of this pope and his henchmen is that they give lip service to the Vatican Council, while in the dark crevices of the Vatican dungeon of horrors, they are doing their level best to reverse the Council , especially in the areas of liturgy and in the practical application of collegiality as a normative modus operandi. As it was laid out for us in the writings of Fathers Kung and Rahner, and Patriarch Maximos IV Saigh, of the Melkite Catholic Church.

All Catholics and other Christian groups, especially those participating closely with us in ecumenical dialog, i.e.the Anglican and the Orthodox churches, need to be on their guard at all times, and watch this pope and his reactionary appointees he's placed in key Vatican offices very, very closely. Watch for what they do rather than for what they say. This is a pope with an agenda he's had for over 25 years and, given his age, he's going to try to implement it as quickly as he can.

Right especially since the typical american nun being investigated is in her 70s or 80s.

Franco,
Here is my attempt to "explain why the visit from the Holy See is such a big deal."

The Catholic Church structure is not something ordained by Christ but something adopted from the secular society in which Christianity took root. The papacy is an adoption of secular kingship. Kings had (or hoped to have) offspring known as princes. That is why we have Cardinals ("Princes of the Church"), not biologically generated by the Pope/King, but personally selected by him for the perpetuation of the regime. The Pope could not personally take charge of Catholics everywhere in the world, so he appoints viceroys (bishops), who are answerable only to the wearer of the royal robes in Rome.

Because this monarchical structure took root in a patriarchal society, all power was reserved to men. Over time in secular Western society, women became liberated. They can vote. They can hold secular office. But the male-dominated Catholic Church is frozen in the past. Women are rigidly excluded from any exercise of authority in the Roman Church. That is why "the visit from the Holy See is such a big deal." Religious orders of women are being investigated by an all-male chauvinist hierarchy. The "visit from the Holy See" is a power play to keep women in their place. That is why Cardinal Rode asserted that the highest virtue is "obedience." That strikes me as a self-serving heresy. St. Paul tells us that the highest virtue is charity, and I'm sure that would be the consensus of Catholic theologians.

Joe Wessling
Cincinnati

Dear Franco, given the whole of your comment and its tone I suspect that any well-intentioned effort to "explain" (your word)why the investigagion is "such a big deal" would hit an impenetrable wall. You intimate that you've carefully followed the whole thing, yet you accuse those with whose opinions you disagree. You throw out things like "apparently infallible and divinely women religious" as if your imaginary opponents proclaim this to be reality. Phrases like "crazed fear mongering" certainly may mean something to you but not to me.

I do have to admit an admiration for your ability to twist logic to your purpose even if by doing so you destroy the very reasonableness you evidently desire to convey. The other thing I admire is another ability to state as fact what is simply opinion with the expectation that we'll fall for it.

I hope no one takes you up on your "request" for an explanation. He/she'll only set her/himself up for more diatribe and illogical prose.

Bravo. well said.

May I add an analogy to help clarify why this "visitation" is such a big deal?

Imagine you are a baptized and confirmed Catholic. You went to Catholic schools, even Catholic University, and after college you sacrificed a good job offer to go work with the poor as a volunteer. You enjoyed volunteering so much that you decided to get a degree in ministry--at your own expense--and work in a parish setting like your home parish. As you began your work, you notice some serious injustice being committed (let's say money is being misallocated or even siphoned away from the social programs for which it was intended so that some of the staff can take a little "vacation"). You sound off about this, but because you are "just a lay person" your voice carries no weight. You sound off again, this time being hushed by the one in charge. Finally you sound off again and are "terminated at will."

Yet you have some support and still decide to speak out. Now all of a sudden someone from Rome decides--without coordinating with you at all--that he is "concerned about your quality of life" and that he will come "visit" you--but you have to pay for his travel and lodging, which includes a private room, faxline and computer with printer and shredder. He says he really is coming out of care for you... and that after he gathers data from you, he will be writing a "report" on your status that he will send to Rome, but you won't get to see a copy of it. You want to tell him of your "termination," but he doesn't want to hear about it, either....

Hope this helps your confusion about why the Apostolic Visitation is such a big deal.

Aileen Due respect, but the Hierarchy is the only friends the dying LCWR orders have.

We've all seen the data; the LCWR has a link on its web site. They are essentially bankrupt, not least b/c they are so irrelevant that they can not attract new members. The neo-traditionalists have some 50% of new sisters (per Georgetown University's CARA) despite being some 5% of sisters

What is wrong w/ the Vatican trying to help the sisters understand why their way of life is so irrelevant? The Vatican did TWO visitations of the men, and there has been a turnaround at the diocesan level.

I'd think a poisonous brew would be to stand by and let the sisters go the way of the Shakers. Oftentimes, outside help is needed for a group to get its arms around what is making it a failing enterprise. This appears to be one of those times.

Eugene's attitude is not witty; his 'enlightened commentary' is a barely-concealed, smirking sarcasm that has all the ivory tower hubris that regular folks just in the pews tolerate quietly & then move on...

Has it ever entered into your mind that perhaps much of what has resulted from Vatican II wasn't intended?

I had to reread the final paragraph of Dr. Kennedy's column twice to try to understand what Tom Sullivan was referring to. What a really stupid remark to equate what Dr. Kennedy was referring to as only having sex. What does this have to say about Mr. Sullivan?

No where in his commentary does Kennedy mention the necessity of having sexual relations with a woman in order to understand women in general. He spoke of having a relationship on some other level than parent/child or student/teacher with a member of the opposite sex. Why are women supposed to be open/required/expected to blindly understand male priests as in personae Christi or to be as brides of Christ - without MEN understanding what it means to take care of a bride and all her needs, emotional, physical and spiritual? To love another does not imply sex...

I sort of agree with you here. A happy love affair can be a very edifying experience. A bitter, nasty train wreck of a love affair can drive a man to join Spanky and Alfalfa in the He-Man Woman-Haters' Club. A celibate life? That sounds like a wash, basically. Under the circumstances, we couldn't hope for better.

who said they have no new recruits? All the congregations I'm aware of have new recruits - maybe not the hundreds as in the past when they were the only opportunities for women to get advanced education in music, nursing, etc. but still new recruits to continue the commission given by Christ, see Matthew 25:31-46.
The reason they need money now? Because they (those who are now elderly and retired) were never given a salary, so not eligible for SS benefits or had opportunities for IRAs, etc. Try that on for size...
And the older canes on any vine always get cut away to provide new growth...what have you done to catholicize your community? Perhaps if your parish's life had been one of serving the needs of the community it would have given better witness to Christ and not be on the wane. Perhaps the Muslim community will bring God back into the community and serve the needs of the poor. The Holy Spirit works within all God's creation - even within our Muslim brothers and sisters. They too are Children of Abraham.

What? Churches are closing down?

I thought gazillions of Tridentine worshiping families with gazillions of children were saving the Church? What,no gazillions of conservative orders also springing up to save the Church?

If you substitute priests for nuns in your argument, it still is true.
- There are fewer and fewer priests
- With fewer in the seminaries
- The number of deacons now outnumber the number of priests
- I've received NO mailings from women religious congregations asking for money, but the archdiocese is constantly requesting money.
- Doesn't look like either the priests or the nuns have much of a future.
- Parishes are closing down all over the country, but it isn't due to the lack of nuns. It's due to the lack of MONEY.
- Re the muslims ... what is your point? Are all muslims bad --- NO! They are just another immigration group after the English, Germans, Italians, Poles, and Irish

David, with the heirachy as immoral and unaccountable as they have proven to be yes, I think an American Reformation is on its way. What has the Popes done in the last 30 years that remind you of the Good News of Jesus Christ? Except maybe for a few good photo ops that JPII was involved in these two men and now their many comrades have worked very hard to make the Roman Catholic Church a Medieval mueseum.

They are getting everyone in line to be smaller and more obedient church. It probably will be smaller, much smaller due to their stupidity and narrowness. Personally, I think they should all leave the church, take their velvet robes and Prada shoes with them and let the laity, priests and sisters who follow Vatican II elect a pastoral loving pope who is part of the 21st century not one longing for the "good old days." These guys have to go or yes many (more than you realize)will be finding a pew in a new and open Catholic Church.

Maybe an American Church "Declaration of Independence" from Rome!

'He is guilty of chararacter assasination of a good man". Alex, your post seems to share in similar guilt. However, Kennesy's essay holds some informative weight.

I agree with you. His motive in writing this perhaps is to pander to Catholic 'intellectuals' who are as lost spiritually and as full of pride as he is.

Jim R on Aug. 12, 2010.

You stated:

("...are under siege for, horror of horrors, adapting to the modern world and its spiritual and educational needs."

If that's what the modern sisters have done in the last 40+ years - with a diminution in numbers by 50%, an average age now of about 70, a minuscule number of sisters under 30, the closing of schools and ministries of all sorts...- well, I would hope the Church would look at what's going on since the good sisters have essentially destroyed or put at serious risk everything their foremothers built.

What constantly amazes me is that so many people posting on these boards seem to think that what has taken place in the Church - loss of faith, diminution in numbers, utter failure and apostasy all around - since Vatican II is not a problem or is a problem that the sisters have not contributed to. Who on earth wants to be a sister today in so many of these orders? - they have become social workers in bad clothes who don't date, disparage dogma and doctrine, adopt loopy new age theories and beliefs, disparage the structure and leaders of the Church, project a dissatisfied attitude about the Church, its history, beliefs, organization, rules....Gee, have any of these dissatisfied angry disbelieving sisters stopped to think that they may be a big part of the problem? Duh! Folks!

By any stretch the sisters need the visitation because they KNOW they have messed up big time. Certainly the hierarchy and priests have, too. But that does not mean the sisters don't need a review. The experiment of the last 40 years in the I'm OK-You're OK anything goes theory of being Church has been a miserable failure and it's time (past time) to reflect upon that and correct it. IMHO.)
-------------------------------------------------

And what closet have you been living in since 1963? The world's society is exactly the same as it was since then, huh? From the way you are writing, its the Sisters' fault that there were social-political upheavels in our society. And its the Sisters' fault that the Civil Rights protests occured. Its the Sisters' fault that the War in Vietnam occured. Its the Sisters' fault that we now have No-fault Divorce Laws. Its the Sisters' fault that so many marriages went on the rocks in the 70's and 80's. That couples refused to listen to Paul VI---and his condemnation of birth control. And its the Sisters' fault that Bishops refused to take the sexual abuse of kids by priests seriously. It's the Sisters' fault that Cardinals walking in the Vatican don't really believe that God will hold them accountable for their greed and desire to hold onto power. Really?

You just go out with your comments about what the Sisters aren't doing---scattering shooting in the air----hoping that you'll hit something. Catholic schools----sorry----but nobody can live on a dollar a day that the Sisters used to be paid. You couldn't Jim, and neither can the Sisters. The modern cost of food, electric and gas bills----never mind medicine---make it an impossibility. Some Sisters still receive a personal budget of $50 a month to live on---and that is for everything that they need. I know of one Sister, whose health needs require her to wear good shoes---costing well over a hundred dollars. She can't get them----because it will be months and months before she will have acquired that amount---trying to save up.

Religious women have offered and still offer so much more to the Church---than by being the door mats that the priests, bishops, cardinals and the popes wipe their feet upon. But that is what you want them to be. Sorry, but you wouldn't offer yourself to be a door mat, would you, Jim?

Your concept of Church Revival (and blaming all of the problems on the Sisters), shows a complete lack of understanding of what is going on in the larger world. The fact that joining a Religious Community is a social step DOWN for a young woman today (not a step or two up as it was in the 1930's, 40's and 50's). And young women have all types of careers open to them that weren't available to them in the early 1960's.

I suggest that you really learn what the Sisters have been doing in the Church before you----let your fingers run faster than your understand.

Today, after all the scandals and lack of Christian response by Bishops, Pope and pastors, the term "Catholic Christian" is an oxymoran. Suggest we all concentrate on Scripture and being follows of Jesus Christ, not followers of the whore of Babylon.