The Independent News Source
Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Sister Surveys -- What Might Have Been
by Ken Briggs on Oct. 01, 2009
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
PDF version
Printer-friendly versionSend to friendPDF versionThe storm over Rome's investigation of American sisters makes me wish that someone of the stature of the late Sister Marie Augusta Neal were doing the kind of sister surveys for which she was renowned.
Neal, one of the first women to earn a Ph.D. at Harvard, conducted all-inclusive surveys to study the influence of Vatican II's directive to U.S. sisters to renew their communities. The first was in 1966, in the wake of that call, and the second was done in 1982. Combined, they showed solid and increasing support for changes instituted by the congregations: housing, work, prayer and personal growth.
In the current turmoil, such a survey could clear up lots of confusion and misunderstanding. Perhaps there is much more of a live-and-let-live frame of mind among both conservatives and liberals. If a majority of sisters on both sides viewed religious life as a common devotion with multiple expressions, would that make a difference? What do sisters themselves think, apart from their leadership or the local bishop's attitudes or Rome's agenda? That would, of course, assume that sisters had a role in deciding their futures.
Such an inquiry might have made an investigation superfluous and nudged communities toward cooperation and understanding. But the top command had other ideas.
EWTN stirs up a lot of
EWTN stirs up a lot of anger/hatred for nuns (who are not part of Mother Angelica's congregation).
And EWTN has a lot of clout with the Vatican. (They broadcast the pope's Masses and talk over choirs that spent months preparing to sing at Midnight Mass, beatifications and canonizations, etc. They talk over the lectors who read the epistles and gospels in languages other than English. Their arrogance is boundless.)
Some leads to information about EWTN's attitude toward (other) nuns:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUS257&ie=UTF-8&q=priest...
But there are those who think Mother Angelica and her priests are heretics. (How will history judge the various factions in today's Church?)
http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUS257&q=ewtn+...
_____________
http://GerelynHollingsworth.com/
Check out
Check out www.thankyousister.com to write a letter in support of women religious.
"The storm over Rome's
"The storm over Rome's investigation of American sisters makes me wish that someone of the stature of the late Sister Marie Augusta Neal were doing the kind of sister surveys for which she was renowned."
Well, the Vatican INQUISITION of American women religious makes ME wish Sister Marjorie Tuite, O.P. were still around to take these fools on. She would make Sister Theresa Kane's righteous indignation look like a Sunday School Picnic...and rightly so. WHERE are Marge's disciples when we need them?
I think that you are quite
I think that you are quite right. While there may very well be some excesses and even abuses on the part of some women religious the real essesence is in the validity of their evolution, exploration, in good faith.
The comparable "essence" in the hierarchical/vatican side is an unspoken, even covert agenda which in itself is an abuse of position, power and integrity. Once one begins a "crusade" one can never disguise it as a "mission of good will" (think Iraq for example). To justify it and defend it as so many have attempted just makes its perversity all the more blatant and scurillous seeming.
It is obvious that it is a "power" move by the hierarchy and if there is a "win/lose" dimension the power boys have already lost. It has shown them to be bullies, arrogant, stupid (that's too strong, yes),disingenuous (not strong enough). For me, it has demonstrated that Pope Benedict's and his predecessor's strategy to "put women in their place", "in the church and in the world" is paramount over the overt rationale of good faith. They have already lost the game they created, set the rules for and started.
More significant,to me, is that it has exposed the depths and breadth of misogyny not only in the hierarchy but in the so-called faithful. It has, thankfully resulted in an outpouring of intelligent and informative expression by and of women religious that would have otherwise remained silent; not to mention, support by people of good will. Most of all, it has exposed in many formats and expressions the rationale for excluding and diminishimg women, in the clergy and in the world. It has been shown that the exclusion of women from ordination not only to be distant from Christlike but rather to be mean, demeaning and wanting in good faith, intelligence, scholarship and most important love or truth.
Chronology will deal with the
Chronology will deal with the problem of wayward religious communities.Those who have adopted the model of dissent and disobedience from the Holy See are dying off- they have no younger memebers in formation. Those who are faithful to the Church and the Holy Fayther are gathering their numbers.Time will tell and the dissenters of the 60's decade will be viewed as a curiosity of a time when feminism destroyed the base of many female active communities in the West
Gerelyn must not watch EWTN.
Gerelyn must not watch EWTN. I've watched frequently and my experience has been entirely different.
This "visitation" by the
This "visitation" by the Vatican, just as the "visitation" of US Seminaries one or two years ago, betray the Vatican's deep distrust and outright suspicion of the American Catholic Church. This has existed for most of the past 200 years: there was a significant break in that attitude by John XXIII who as one of his first acts as Pope made Archbishop Cushing of Boston a cardinal. John Paul II and Benedict XVI have held the same disdain for the US Church. The problem is, the US Bishops have surrendered to Rome's view of us and are complicit in these investigations. If the seminaries and convents of the US have been so out of control and border on the heretical or the illicit, then why hadn't the US bishops gotten wind of that and acted before Rome got involved? Why was it that the major superior's of men's religious orders were the ones who stood up to Rome in their response to the visitation report while the US Bishops remained silent? The heirarchy in this country have failed us in so many ways - not to mention in the clergy sex abuse crisis - they have earned if not a lack of respect from the faithful, certainly a degradation of their authority as diocesan leaders. I, for one, would have no problem with the sisters of the US congregations saying they will not participate in such an inquiry until Rome states it's concerns and issues openly. I would be shocked if even one US Bishop stood up for them if they did so - they don't seem to have such fortitude. For anyone who doubted it before, Benedict is damn determined to force the entire Catholic community into his rigid and medievil view of Catholocism by any means possible. We need a Pope John XXIII again. Let us pray!
Why are you people so sure
Why are you people so sure this is about power? I mean, I know emotions are running high and all. But in all seriousness maybe the Pope is truly concerned? Reading our pope's writings I don't find him to be the sinister authoritarian man you people think he is. I think his primary goal is the salvation of souls. I think he believes that the liturgy needs to be reverent. That priets need to put the sacraments and salvations of their condregations FIRST. And that Catholics in positions of authority, such as priests, religious, bishops, and even politicians, should be putting God above everything else!
When we hear of sisters running around preaching how great abortion is or how we need to "move beyond Jesus" or embracing heretical theologies then there IS a need for an investigation. Note how the Legion of Christ is also being investigated. Your anger is obviously based on sadness and a feeling of being marginalized. But please don't feel anger at our pope.
Everything above is addressed to NCR readers. To NCR: you should all be ashamed of yourselves from trying to drive a wedge between the pope and the laity. Shame on the NCR.
A Sinner: When we hear of
A Sinner:
When we hear of sisters running around preaching how great abortion is or how we need to "move beyond Jesus" or embracing heretical theologies then there is a need for an investigation.
The statement above is judgmental and beyond belief!!! I believe you are projecting your anger on those who have different understanding and evaluation of the investigation of the sisters by the Vatican. I do not accept the shame you are addressing to the readers of NCR. NCR has nothing to be ashamed for - as they provide a great service of what is truly happening within the Catholic Church and the world.
Why do NCR writers think it
Why do NCR writers think it is about power and power only? Maybe this story can help you understand:
Years ago, then president Carter got the B-1 bomber program defunded. He did this to free up money for domestic projects, I think it turned out, and because he thought the program was unneeded. The Soviets went into total panic mode. Why? Because the ONLY reason they could think of why ANYONE would defund a weapon system as effective as the B-1 program was meant to be, would be to fund AN EVEN BETTER WEAPON SYSTEM. Why? Because that's the only reason THEY would have done it. (Later on, funding was given to it again.)
What's the lesson here? Simple. 'Progressive' Catholics ARE all about getting power and exercising it (listen to the womanpriest movement for 5 minutes if you want a good example). They gasp that this visit could only be about power, because that's the only reason they would do it for.
Kind of like the idea of 'projection'.
They can't possibly accept that perhaps, just perhaps, the Holy Father is actually concerned about the spiritual health of these communities.
As a woman religious who
As a woman religious who serves on our Province Leadership Team, I have the task of drafting responses for a portion of the Vatican's questionaire, i.e. Part 2, Section B. Do I consider this a teachable moment for the Vatican and respond with the truth, risking recriminations? ("We use the 'Companion to the Breviary', a non-approved text.") Or do I dissemble and lose a piece of my/our integrity? ("We use an approved version of the Liturgy of the Hours--here comes a mental reservation--approved by us!) I hate this whole process!
First of all Anonymous - may
First of all Anonymous - may I suggest you use a different name, as there are many "anonymous" on these sites and it gets very, very confusing as to which one is saying what. But more importantly, I am pained by your dilemma, and I think it is reflective of the terrible conflict Rome and the US Bishops have put you in. I would encourage you to consult with your provincial team on how to respond (I have suggested that the US congregations of women refuse to participate until the Vatican clearly stated it's purpose and issues involved with the "visitation"). But one word of caution: making revisions in your community's liturgical practices should definitely be reviewed and approved by, in addition to the congregation, someone else in some external authority to do so. It will insulate you from just these kinds of criticisms and "visitations." I wish you well, and will keep you and all of the nuns being pushed into this in my prayers.
"Do I consider this a
"Do I consider this a teachable moment for the Vatican and respond with the truth, risking recriminations? ... Or do I dissemble and lose a piece of my/our integrity?"
Wait a second! Are you for REAL!? Are you really asking this? Are you, a consecrated nun by the sound of your post, really wavering between telling the truth or lying?
I can't honestly believe what I just read!!! Perhaps the religious orders here in the States really ARE in deep trouble.
The nuns should have been
The nuns should have been investigated and disciplined 30 years ago. It's a little late in the day now! There are so many pointers to mismanagement during the reign of JPII. Why would anyone think he is a saint? He even got rid of the devil's advocate in the canonization process. Just when this office is needed most! I mean yes, there were some good things in his reign but no real (needed) reform of the Church.
That's because John Paul II
That's because John Paul II had no intention of making reforms: he, and now Benedict, wanted to drag the Church back to the middle ages, and that is why things are such a mess now. But there are plenty of us who are committed to not letting that happen, as we are strongly Vatican II Catholics.
Having read the documents
Having read the documents from VII (unlike, I would guess, most of the people on this site), I think Pope Benedict is a true Vatican II pope, as was JPII.
Pray tell me, what of the statements and declarations in the documents of the Council has he defied or thrown out? Since you are 'committed to not letting it happen', I am sure you will have no trouble with giving me a few paragraph references from the applicable council docs and detail how he has broken from them, right? I mean, you MUST have done this already if you are so certain that he is anti-Vatican II. Because if you have not, well, that would mean you really don't know what you're talking about, and that's just silly. Be specific, please, as from your statement, if you are 'committed to not letting it happen', you must have at least a solid familarity with the content of the council documents themselves, right?
I think you would be well served to re read the documents of the council, then go and read the Pope's own writings.
Vatican II, Schmatican II!
Vatican II, Schmatican II! What is important is orthodoxy and the rule of law in the Church. No institution can long survive without law!
What is important is adherence to the whole Deposit of the Faith and respect for the moral law. What is important is respect for Tradition & respect for legitimate authority in the Church. People living good, holy & pure lives. That is the bottom line for true Catholics! That's the only way to get into heaven for all human beings, not just Catholics. That's all that is really important in the final analysis. "What doth it profit a man to gain the whole world if he should lose his immortal soul in the process?"
There are often comments on
There are often comments on this website from folks that disparage the orders of women religious by saying, "Don't worry, these sisters are aging and dying off! They will all be dead soon and we can move the Church back to what we want it to be." Guess what, that's what other folks say about uh, you and your medieval philosophies.
Similarly, these folks claim that the numbers of pre-Vatican II women religious are growing. If you count the number of new vocations in terms of raw numbers instead of percentages, the orders of traditional women religious you appear to be "wishing death upon" still have more new vocations than the few supposedly "growing" pre-Vatican II orders reverting to wearing their burkas.
Where do we get the idea that
Where do we get the idea that they are fading? Partially, from those nuns themselves.
"Some interpret empty novitiates and an aging membership as evidence that women religious have made the wrong choice—for secularization."
it's kind of hard to declare that you're a growing force when your own side admits they are vanishing.
Pete, "Some interpret empty
Pete,
"Some interpret empty novitiates and an aging membership as evidence that women religious have made the wrong choice--for secularization."
And some interpret the same factors as having come from the shameful, despicable, dehumanizing way the Vatican and all male Church leadership treats women.
That's a very silly idea. If
That's a very silly idea. If the Church's outlook on women were the cause, then why are we having such a decline now? Why not ALWAYS? In fact, how did we ever get nuns to begin with if the Church's teaching hasn't changed suddenly?
And besides, not all orders are having this issue. Here's an assignment for you - Go look at the orders that are still getting lots of novices. Compare them to the orders that are vanishing. Look at what the common traits are and where they differ.
"shameful, despicable, dehumanizing way the Vatican and all male Church leadership treats women."
- I think you need to get a reality check.
You may be right in terms of
You may be right in terms of the raw numbers but that is still small comfort to the Liberal (no habit) orders. The reason is that their median age is somewhere over 60. In order to sustain themselves they need a massive infusion of younger women earning money to help the community support the older women who simply can't work anymore. For the most part, nuns are nuns and they will work till they drop but hard work doesn't always produce enough dough! These orders need younger women with marketable skills in the larger society to bring home the bacon. It's a matter of survival for them.
The women entering the conservative (habit) orders are interested in the traditional religious life which has to do with a strong sense of community, a strong prayer life and a common apostolate. Since there are enough younger women entering, they do not have to work in the secular world just to bring home a pay check which will help support the older nuns. That is the essential difference between the two groups.
Lost amidst these noxious
Lost amidst these noxious comments is Ken's Briggs brilliant idea of hearing from the sisters themselves--not what the Vatican thinks it sees and hears, but the sisters' own experiences, collected and presented in a scientific, transparent survey. There have been insinuations in the news that an anonymous donor prompted the Vatican's investigation. Well, perhaps some university or the LCWR could find its own anonymous donor to the sisters justice by soliciting their experiences and thoughts.
Shut up & teach or nurse,
Shut up & teach or nurse, seems the outdated idea of a Sister for some readers. Would Jesus be fighting over silly politics of an male ego driven idea of what a woman religious should be and do, and what makes people feel warm and fuzzy, or uncomfortable? Jesus wanted us all to Love one another as he loved us, and YOU cant even get that simple message. I respect all Sisters, and the clothing they choose to wear, is what would be best to serve those they encounter. Not a power trip of expected privledge. The 1950's are over, its a new day with new ways of reaching God's people. I think its wonderful that Mother Angelica wants to look like a woman from the 1600's if that is what serves her and those she connects with. Not everyone lives in Alabama. Peace-Patrick Peter
I think you have a
I think you have a misunderstanding of the entire issue.
The purpose Vatican's visitation is not to go out and see which orders are wearing habits, as your post seems to believe. Nor is it for any other such superficial reason.
If a nun wears a habit or not is hardly a major concern of the Church. Whether they are 'Post Christian' or have 'moved beyond Jesus', IS a concern, and a very valid one.
Post new comment