The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
PDF versionVatican must hear 'anger and hurt' of American nuns, official says
by John L Allen Jr on Dec. 07, 2010
ROME -- Rome must acknowledge the “depth of anger and hurt” provoked by a visitation of American nuns, the Vatican’s number two official for religious life has said, saying it illustrates the need for a “strategy of reconciliation” with women religious.
Archbishop Joseph Tobin, Secretary of the Vatican’s Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, said that he does not expect any “punitive” fallout from the visitation, and that before any decisions are made, women’s communities should have a chance to know the results and to respond.
That addresses a central concern of many women religious, who have objected to what some perceive as the secrecy of the process. Tobin said that as a matter of “justice and charity,” he will “strongly advocate” for feedback and a right of reply.
Tobin’s comments on the visitation came in a Dec. 6 interview with NCR in Rome.
Announced in early 2009, the visitation is currently in “phase three”, meaning on-site visits to selected congregations. The aim is for reports to be delivered to the Vatican throughout 2011, marking the formal end of the process.
Mother Clare Millea, an American who serves as Superior General of the Apostles of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, is heading up the visitation on the Vatican’s behalf.
Tobin, 58, is also an American who grew up in Detroit, and who served two terms as Superior General of the Redemptorist order prior to his Vatican appointment in August. He’s been in his new job since September -- a position in which Tobin will likely play a key role in shaping the Vatican's response to Millea's reports.
A fuller version of the interview with Tobin will appear in Friday’s “All Things Catholic” column, including reflections on the state of religious life in various parts of the world, and some discoveries about the internal culture of the Vatican.
The following are the portions of the Dec. 6 interview which concern the visitation of women religious in the United States.
So far, have you worked much on the visitation of American women religious?
I wouldn’t say it’s a daily issue in the dicastery, because there are so many other ones, some of which may be more urgent in a local area. But [the visitation] is certainly there. I met Mother Millea last month and had a chance to hear her experience. I’ve also met with different people, such as the past president of the LCWR and other American religious who are passing through Rome.
NCR: February 17-March 1, 2012
Subscribe to NCR to get all the news and special features that aren't always available online. In this issue:
- Conscience Roundup
Hear what theologians, commentators, and our editors have to say about the contraception mandate
- Special Section: Religious Life
Work of missioners, past and future; African meetings; and more
- Tribute to a Peacemaker
New York's Pax Christi fetes Daniel Berrigan
I’m picking up the impression that it’s not as bad as people thought it was going to be, but there still is a need for a strategy of reconciliation.
What do you mean by that?
A number of leaders of women’s congregations have said to me that they’ve been surprised by the depth of anger and hurt that exists among the sisters. I think that can’t be ignored. It has to be addressed, it’s a sign of the times.
Do you have a sense at this stage of how to address it?
I think it would be arrogant on my part to say that. I remember talking to a couple of sisters, and I said, ‘Look, I’m not naive enough to think that trust can be built overnight, or even through a nice meeting, but at least we’ve got to talk.’
I also don’t think the answer is just with me. I think my dicastery and others have to hear the experience of women religious, and women religious too have to hear the experience of pastors and this dicastery. We have to try to heal what can be healed.
Your office won’t be seeing any reports from the visitation until next year?
That’s right. Everything so far has been oral.
Is it therefore too early to talk about what the end-game might be?
Yes, although I can say that I would be very surprised if anybody would purport to give any punitive or overly prescriptive norms as a result of this visitation. If the visitors, in dialogue with the sisters, have identified some specific issues that need to be dealt with, okay. But forcing people into habits or something like that? That’s not what this is about.
There’s another side to this, which is that if anybody needed to be convinced of the complexity of the United States, just do an apostolic visit! There are stereotypes of Americans in the air sometimes, and there’s a risk of falling victim to those stereotypes among people who don’t know the country.
In other words, this visitation could be a learning experience for Rome as well?
Sure, that’s what I’m saying.
You don’t anticipate that the visitation is going to trigger an earthquake in women’s religious life in America?
No, I don’t. I think that would be really disrespectful of what women religious in America have accomplished. Anyway, earthquakes in religious life generally don’t work out very well. Pope Clement XIV suppressed the Jesuits, for example, and in retrospect that wasn’t a very good idea!
We’re not likely to see anything like that?
No.
One source of concern often expressed by women religious is that they’re not going to see the results of the visitation or have any opportunity to respond. What can you say about that?
I really believe that people have a right to some sort of response. I don’t want to do Mother Millea’s job, in the sense of sitting here in Rome and contradicting instructions she’s received. But I can say that my experience of visitations, having done them for 18 years in seventy countries, is that there always is feedback … always. That’s a respectful part of the dialogue, and it also makes sure that the visitation isn’t a flash in the pan, or what’s worse, some sort of trauma that’s unresolved. You don’t want people to feel like they’ve been punched but they don’t know what it was all about.
Your intention is that people will get some kind of feedback?
Yes. All my experience tells me that’s the way to go. I don’t want to subvert the visitation teams by proclaiming something in an interview, but I will strongly advocate for feedback.
The concern is not just feedback, but also the opportunity for response. If somebody feels that something has been reported to you which doesn’t accurately reflect the reality of their community, will they have an opportunity to respond?
First of all, people write to this dicastery all the time. They’re free to do that.
Of course, that presumes people know what’s being said about them. Some sisters worry that you’re getting a secret indictment about them, and that you’re going to make policy decisions based on that, without them ever knowing it.
That may be a perception, I wouldn’t deny that. I’ve heard people question the motivation for this visitation, the appropriateness of it, but I’ve not yet heard anybody say that the visitors were unfair.
But of course no one has seen the final work product of those visitors. Can you assure people that if a visit identifies a problem in a community, that community will have a chance to respond before policy decisions are made?
Oh, yes. I think justice and charity would dictate that. We also have to be humble and acknowledge that sometimes you get the wrong impression. At the end of our visitations with the Redemptorists, before we went back to Rome we would meet with the provincial council and say, ‘This is what we saw. Does that sound anything like your province, or does it sound like the province from Mars?’ If it’s the province from Mars, we haven’t done a very good job and we have to do it again. People would either say, ‘That’s about right,’ or they would say, ‘Wait a minute … how many people said that?’ If the visitor said, ‘we heard it from a couple,’ they might respond, ‘That’s probably not a universal opinion.’
That’s a long way of saying that before concrete decisions are going to be made, the accuracy of the perceptions has to be tested.
There is also a parallel review of the LCWR being conducted through the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Do you have any involvement with that?
No, and I’ve not heard anything about it other than what I’ve read. There’s been no communication with me about that visitation.
The anger and hurt of the
The anger and hurt of the American nuns who were forced out of religious life in the 1960s and70s by the cadre of Marxist-feminists who took over after the Vatican II and radically secularised their communities? Or perhaps it's the anger and hurt of American nuns who have seen vocations to religious life dry up after their communities abandoned Christ and His Holy Church in exchange for tired 1960s-style political radicalism...
I agree. The anger and hurt of those nuns who remained faithful to Christ and their religion must, finally, be heard.
To H. White: WHAT are you
To H. White: WHAT are you talking about? are you a woman? were you one of those nuns "forced out" in the 60's and 70's?? I was a nun during those years and I never, not ever, met even a single "Marxist-feminist" nun who was taking over her community after Vatican II. Rather, I knew many good, holy women who were seriously studying the documents of Vatican II, especially the one on the renewal of religious life, and then slowly taking steps to go back to the original charism of their founder or foundress and to study, pray and determine the best ways to become relevant in the modern world of the (then) 20th century.
I think you sound like a man, very much threatened by intellegent, independent and holy women and that you want all nuns to get back into their habits and be in their convents by 5pm and do what the "good pastor" tells them to do, and to be the "good little nuns" of the Bells of St. Mary's. It ain't gonna happen; the Spirit is moving among them and they are doing God's work in our world--praise be to God...
Your misandrist attitude is
Your misandrist attitude is offensive. Men can talk about women and women can talk about men. Your cruel feminist attitude betrays that indeed, H White is correct. Congratulations for proving his/her point.
(a young catholic man)
Janus Lockius on Dec. 08,
Janus Lockius on Dec. 08, 2010.
You stated:
"Your misandrist attitude is offensive. Men can talk about women and women can talk about men. Your cruel feminist attitude betrays that indeed, H White is correct. Congratulations for proving his/her point.
(a young catholic man)"
---------------------------------
Were you in the Catholic convents of the mid-60's and 70's? You say that you are a young Catholic man---so you don't really know for sure, do you?
Both bloggers (who claimed to be in the convent at this time period), had points of view---and both shared them. And that is all that you know.
What is offensive---is believing that one blogger's experiences trump the other's experiences. Or that one is a 'misandrist.'
Balance, young man, balance!
What Janus probably found
What Janus probably found offensive, as did I, was Marion starting her dismissal of H. White's comment with 'you sound like a man', as if H. White's gender has any relevance whatsoever to the position he/she put forward. I know many females, and know of many more, who were in convents in the 60s, 70s and 80s who agree with H. White; though I personally believe the term 'Marxist/feminist' is a little restrictive.
What amuses me, though, is the narrowness of Marion's dismissal. Because she didn't know anyone who, in her opinion, fits the description given by H. White, White can be dismissed as a man who is scared of women.
Well, as I said below, I personally know a few fine women who suffered through what Marion dismisses.
So yes, you're quite right: balance is very important.
I was not in a convent no.
I was not in a convent no. That does not mean I cannot find out what it was like, and it is clear to me that those who fled were those who suddenly thought the Church had suddenly abolished the moral law, but were disappointed that it was not so they left.
You judge the veracity and tone of my post. Do not think that I cannot do the same. That author insinuated that the person she was replying to was a man and that ergo, he was unqualified to respond to this question because of his sex. That is misandry.
Balance will be mine if God grants it to me when I die. In the meantime, I seek to live a moral life according to the precepts of God as communicated through his Church.
Oh realy young Catholic man.
Oh realy young Catholic man. Can't take it? Read the nasty things church fathers like Tertullian, Iraneaus, Aquinas, the Bible boys had to say about women. they're all famous and and highly revered. All promoted to the top of the heap of the good old Patriarchy club because they were misogynists to the max.
A little equal time for lowly females is a good thing. We need a heck of a lot more of it! Maybe then the first shall be last and the times will change for the better!
I have read all of those
I have read all of those actually. Their "promotion" was not due to whatever it was that they said about women, but rather because they were holy, just like St Catherine and other holy women.
Tertullian wrote about the conduct of women and priased chastity. So what?
Iraneaus didn't write about women to my knowledge.
Aquinas is Aquinas, I do not need to defend the greatest theologian who ever lived and the man whose writings convinced me that Jesus is God.
as for the "bible boys" I have no idea to whom you refer and figure that once again you are simply being misandrist for some odd reason.
Women are equal to men, politically and in the eyes of God. That is the way I see it.
Women were matriarchs in some pagan societies and look where they are today. Gone. Maybe they will return. Maybe not. Either way, whether or not we have a man or woman as the head of a family matters not in the eternal scheme of things.
"and determine the best ways
"and determine the best ways to become relevant in the modern world of the (then) 20th century. "
The problem is that far too many of them, rather than figuring out how to best fulfill their mission in the modern world, allowed themselves to be caught up in the tentacles of modernism, and thus were consumed by the modern world.
I think it's very interesting that those nuns who maintain the traditional spirituality and are faithful to the Church don't seem to have any concerns or angst over the visitation.
Remember that it was the Church Christ gave us to show us the way to salvation. Not priests. Not nuns. But the Church. Yes, the priests and nuns who remain faithful to the Church are crucial to her fulfilling her mission, but they are the servants, but they must remember that they lead only through their service and obedience: they are not the ones who are in charge.
Obedient to whom, the males
Obedient to whom, the males or the gospel??? The hierarchy are preaching what they do not live. The sisters are true to Jesus example and teaching. If they are not, they condemn themselves, along with those criminal, ungodly men
"The hierarchy are preaching
"The hierarchy are preaching what they do not live"
Every one in the "hierarchy" is a sinner, just like you and me. As a result, there will always be times they don't live what they preach. I'd be more suspect if they did live in perfect concordance with what they preach -- that would mean their preaching is too soft!
While the individuals members of the Church are flawed, the Magisterium -- the teaching authority -- is not. As Catholics, we are obligated to assent to the teaching authority of the Church -- all of it, not only those parts we agree with or even only those found in Scripture. Remember the Creed: "I believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic (yep, those evil men!) Church"? If you are in discord with the Magisterium (which is different from the hierarchy), by definition you don't believe in the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church, for you are defining your own church.
Yes, there are many nuns out that that work very hard living part of what Jesus taught. The problem is when the don't believe -- or, worse yet, actively dissent from -- other teachings (e.g., supporting abortion, contraception, homosexual relationships, etc.).
"The sisters are true to Jesus example and teaching. If they are not, they condemn themselves"
You can't be partly true to Jesus: either you are with Him all the way, or you're not with Him at all. So, as you yourself correctly observe, many condemn themselves.
As Catholics we are obliged
As Catholics we are obliged to "think with the church". Children don't think they obey without thinking.....Adults listen, discuss and think...
Two points: 1) When 'adults'
Two points:
1) When 'adults' who don't know (us) are taught by someone that does know (Holy Mother Church), they 'discuss' so that they understand what they are taught, we don't 'discuss' to change what is taught, because (after all) she's the one who knows, not us.
2) Flat out contradicting is not actually 'discussing' anyway.
3) Matthew 18:3 "Unless you be converted, and become as little children, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven", so best of luck with that whole 'we are adults' thing.
Marion K, Your clear, and
Marion K, Your clear, and concise answer to H. White made my day. Your assessment of the all male dominated institution, our Catholic church, is on the dot in your second paragraph. I am so grateful for all the other--in the majority--positive, supportive comments for the sisters. Most of them live heroic lives, which their male counterparts have not even come close in duplicating. The bulk of the work in the church has always and still is being done by the nuns, and lay women. And all this without been given any voice and recognition whatsoever.
Check you www.takingfive.com by a very devout Catholic journalist, Ruth Bertels. She documents the disregard and neglect of the Vatican for African nuns, who are being oppressed by their evil bishops.
"The bulk of the work in the
"The bulk of the work in the church has always and still is being done by the nuns, and lay women. And all this without been given any voice and recognition whatsoever. "
Traditionally, you are correct. Now? At least in the U.S.... Have you been to a Catholic hospital lately? How many nuns did you see there? Teaching in a Catholic school? Nuns can't do the bulk of the work now simply because there aren't enough of them to do it, and there haven't been for years.
Make no mistake, there are very devout nuns. And there are many nuns who, while they work hard to help those in need, have wandered far astray of the faith. Being faithful means to the entire faith, not only the parts you agree with. To be faithful one must follow the Magisterium, not try to put one self above it. This is where many of the modern nuns (not to mention many, many other Catholics) fail. There is no obedience and no humility.
"She documents the disregard and neglect of the Vatican for African nuns, who are being oppressed by their evil bishops."
If this is true, then it is despicable and needs to be addressed. But what does it have to do with the scope of this article? The only reason I see for bringing it up here is to distract attention from the reality of this situation: that the real problem with the visitation is not that it is occurring, but that it didn't occur 30 years ago -- when it might have done some good.
If this is true, then it is
If this is true, then it is despicable and needs to be addressed. But what does it have to do with the scope of this article?
________________________________
It's born of the same damnable disease Jerry ... to wit, Patriarchal sexist exploitation, arrogance, and the triumphal delusion of invinciblity.
The only sure fire saints
The only sure fire saints I've met in the last 10 years are the 2 Franciscan nuns that have been assigned as spiritual counsellors to my rural Catholic Hospital in NE Oregon. They have lived next door and have been available 24/7/365 except about 2 weeks a year they go to visit family. They are the spiritual rocks of the hospital board and the Ethics Committee. They have ministered to those in crisis irregardless of the person's religion, or lack there of. Sadly, I can't say the same about the local priest. I only wish there were more of them, but that does not for one minute diminish their vocations.
My mother was one. She wasn't
My mother was one. She wasn't allowed to make her final profession because she wanted to follow what the documents of Vatican II actually said.
Another I know is a Dominican nun who was told to apply to Rome to be dispensed from her vows because she wanted to teach her class things like the Real Presences to first communicants. Such audacity.
Fortunately she didn't apply, as she’s now Mother Superior of a convent of traditional Dominican nuns, which as grown five fold in the last 10 years and is home to the youngest nuns in the country (not the US, btw), the average age being about 25.
So, how's your order doing?
Marion and H White: The
Marion and H White: The criminal hierarchy are the reason for the decline in membership of the religious orders. The young women of today are knowledgeable and educated. They know that nuns--and for that matter all women--are treated with disrespect,inequality, and abuse by the majority of the clergy. Now why would a young women subject herself to the blind obedience and slavery which is expected even today of the nuns? Idealistic young people see and judge the unchristian life style of those men. The pompous attire and ceremonies do not represent to the young ones the model of Christ. This generation will not have those kind of men lord over them, who preach what they do not practice. They will find other outlets for their benevolence and idealism. I see it in my daughters.
The nuns were the ones who built Catholic communities, doing the bulk of the work--with the help of lay women--all the while being mistreated by the bishops and priests. Did they ever get recognition for that? Of course not. And they will never give it to them, while they demand places of honor, respect, and recognition for the fruits the nuns labored for.
Thanks, Marion K.!!!
Thanks, Marion K.!!!
To Marion K...you sound
To Marion K...you sound exactly like a Marxist feminist nun and don't even realise it! You sound rebellious, just like a Communist! Where has Poverty, Chastity and OBEDIENCE gone? It's so evident that Vatican II changed the way of all Catholic thinking which was meant only for one's salvation until the evils of Vatican II changed everything. Have you ever read about the Reformation in England after King Henry's VIII's reign? Did he not ramsack all the monasteries and religious places and take their wealth and give it to his henchmen? The only difference with Vatican II is that there has been no bloodshed - yet. Admit it, the changes after Vat II have been a disaster. As I am convinced when I read your message.
I was not. I was, however, in
I was not. I was, however, in gradeschool in the 1970's in a parochial school and saw the Sisters of St. Joseph secularize and then leave after the bishop told them to wear their habits. Their depature undermined religious education for years. I realized the impact after I became an adult, of course, for while I was at it, religion class was the time to overwhelm the poor old lay teacher and do whatever we wished.
All we have to do is ask you, ma'am, the average age of the "bright, intelligent" women that is supposed to threaten us still inhabiting your congregation, and compare it with the average age of those congregations of sisters that are thriving and ASK WHY.
You are just upset and angry that we don't believe you any more.
Merry Christmas,
-Theo
Yesss! H. White- as a
Yesss! H. White- as a layperson (female) working for a Catholic parish, I see how much women get accomplished in the church, and not because of the excellent leadership of its clergy (male), but more so because they (we) are more focused and work-minded. Yet it is not the women who are involved in major decision making beyond the level of the local parish. Why?? I think that as an institution, the Church has a hard time acknowledging the power for change that we women wield and strive to keep us in our "place" by bending and shaping the theology of who has "divine right" to lead so that males are in positions of power.
H White!!!! You are entirely
H White!!!!
You are entirely off base in assessing Vatican 2 as well as the sisters who followed the advice of holy Pope John 23. I am not a nun, but went all the way through high school with nuns. It was sadistic hierarchy who forced them to live. Among others situations, in the icy and cold conditions of winter they lived in unheated living quarters, while their male counterparts had all the comfort anybody would need to survive. They were regularly verbally abused by parish priests in front of the school children. I could go down the list for 2 pages.
Today I see the so called secularized sisters down in the trenches with the needy and suffering. Without exception they live the gospel life to the fullest. This unholy Church wants them back as slaves to abuse as before Vatican 2. Right now the bishops of Africa founded their own orders, and use the convents as bordellos for themselves and their clergy, to avoid prostitutes for the fear of aids. Those sisters have been made totally dependent on bishops. And the Vatican has done nothing about it.
The Ungodly hierarchy is favoring such deplorable sects as Opus Dei, who has their women members sleeping on boards all the time, and the men once a week.
And this you call our HOLY CHURCH?????
I am a women but not even a nun.
H. White, I am a former
H. White, I am a former American nun who left community in the 1980's and it was NOT because of Marxist-feminists who took over after the Vatican II. In fact, I would have remained an American nun, and in many ways have continued to live my secular, Marxist-feminist, life being TRUE to the PERSON GOD MADE ME TO BE. I was one of those Idealists, inspired by John F. Kennedy to either join the Peace Corps or Religious Life...I wanted to Know, Love and Serve God in this world as I had learned at age 6 yrs. AND I HAVE DONE SO. I also prayed relentlessly that God would cure me of my love for my same sex, something I knew but did not understand since a very young child.
I left because by age 30 yr.+ CELIBACY was no longer something that I wanted to struggle to maintain as I had kept my VOWS to the "T" while having deep love and feelings for a "particular" friend, while at the same time loving all my sisters with generosity and understanding.
I have remained a part of my Community in heart, mind and spirit (as most of us who left have) and I have lived my life of Simplicity by giving my time and money as a Social Worker (I got my Masters after leaving the Convent).
I have continued even after Retirement to volunteer visiting the elderly, helping start up a group home for Adult Developmentally Different persons... while being in a monogamous relationship. I have continued to love and share my compassion and understanding with many. SO LET IT BE KNOWN THAT MYSELF AND MANY OF MY FORMER NUN FRIENDS, LEFT NOT BECAUSE OF THE SECULARIZATION OF RELIGIOUS COMMUNITIES, WE LEFT BECAUSE OF THE INTOLLERABLE VOW OF CELIBACY.
Perhaps ROME needs to look at CELIBACY, particularly when it comes to priests.
We would not have so many children who have been sexually abused by priests. Why has ROME always hidden and transferred these wounded men? And instead did a 20th Century "WITCH HUNT" of United States Religious Women.
Not only are American nuns' hurt and angered by this "witch hunt" we lay women and men are infuriated, even those who are not Catholic or those like me who are no longer Catholic. It IS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, that is out of touch with reality....and it is the American NUNS who are very "in touch" and walking the path of Jesus's words to care for those who are in need of His healing love and acceptance.
Jesus would not even acknowledge such a CATHOLIC CHURCH if he were to walk among us today.
Besides he did not found the Catholic Church....THE ROMANS' did. They took the early Christian Community and co-opted them in order to gain POWER over the world. That is so NOT what Jesus was about. I have found a loving Worshiping Community in the MCC Church of Toronto, Canada. A Church that welcomes all persons of any path to God. Now, that is what the ROMAN Catholic Church needs to take note of. Gardy
Thank you for your response
Thank you for your response to White.
I see you founded a group home for Adult Developmentally Different persons. I am an adult with high-functioning autism and have not been able to find a home for women. Where is your home and do you take women? If so, could you tell me more about it? Please respond directly to my email rather than to the blog. Thanks.
The intolerable vow of
The intolerable vow of celibacy? This is a sacred tradition that goes back to the founding of the Church. It has been a part of the Roman tradition for at the very least 1000 years. It has been upheld throughout the ages, even through Vatican II.
There has been no link of celibacy to child-abuse either. There is more abuse by clerics in every other sect of Christianity than there is in the Catholic Church, and even if this was not the case, not EVERY priest is abusing children. The larger majority are not.
Christ did indeed found the Catholic Church, built on the Rock of Peter and the Cornerstone of Christ. The Church was not founded by the Romans; the Church was in fact persecuted by the Romans. The Catholic Church has the fullness of truth, and all truth subsists in it. Being a former nun, you should know this. Leaving your vocation is one thing; leaving the Church is another. The Church says "they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it." (Lumen Gentium 14)
I will pray for you, and I hope that you will pray for me.
Joseph on Dec. 08, 2010. You
Joseph on Dec. 08, 2010.
You stated:
"The intolerable vow of celibacy? This is a sacred tradition that goes back to the founding of the Church. It has been a part of the Roman tradition for at the very least 1000 years. It has been upheld throughout the ages, even through Vatican II.
There has been no link of celibacy to child-abuse either. There is more abuse by clerics in every other sect of Christianity than there is in the Catholic Church, and even if this was not the case, not EVERY priest is abusing children. The larger majority are not.
Christ did indeed found the Catholic Church, built on the Rock of Peter and the Cornerstone of Christ. The Church was not founded by the Romans; the Church was in fact persecuted by the Romans. The Catholic Church has the fullness of truth, and all truth subsists in it. Being a former nun, you should know this. Leaving your vocation is one thing; leaving the Church is another. The Church says "they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it." (Lumen Gentium 14)
I will pray for you, and I hope that you will pray for me."
-------------------------------------------------------------
Please study Church History! None of the Apostles (except young John) were celibate. The people were married, had children, and this continued for a 1000 years. Celibacy grew out of the Gnostic heresy---which believed that a man debases himself if he enteres into marriage or a sexual relationship with a woman (many priests during the time period from Constantine to the year 1000 had common law wives).
Women were taught to become more spiritual by refusing to be married or to have children. Community life for women was believed to aid them to remain celibate.
Who has been teaching you about the documents of Vatican II? Mother Angelica on EWTN? I strongly encourage you to read in entirety "Luman Gentium" and along with it the 'Decree on Ecumenism' (Unitatis Redintegratio). Protestants are NOT going to Hell in a handbag.
The Church is a living body that continues to grow, both in its understanding of its mission and place in the world. It does not possess all KNOWLEDGE in a complete package in its complete entirety----(only God possesses that).
As far as your comments about ministers in other Christian sects abusing children more than what went on in the Catholic Church---The Catholic Church was the largest Christian Group. All the Protestant ministers put together who abused children/youth did not equal the number of priests (and bishops) who abused youngsters. We had THOUSANDS! And that is not counting what went on in Europe, Canada, Australia,---- and Africa and South American hasn't even really begun to count their numbers yet.
"Perhaps ROME needs to look
"Perhaps ROME needs to look at CELIBACY, particularly when it comes to priests.
We would not have so many children who have been sexually abused by priests."
While there are rational, albeit not necessarily convincing, arguments against priestly celibacy, reducing the incidents of child sexual abuse is not one of them. Contra, it is as irrational an argument as there is.
A priest with a normal sexual attraction -- to adult females -- who is unable to maintain his vow of chastity will enter into an affair with an adult female, perhaps with an older teenage female, not with a child.
If you can't accept this on reason, let's look at facts: many teachers who sexually abuse children are married. Are they pedophile priests somehow different from pedophile teachers in this regard?
Also consider that the vast majority of the children abused by priests are males. Thus, there are two disordered sexual attractions involved: pedophilia and homosexuality. Do adult homosexuals who marry members of the opposite sex stop having homosexual relationships? In most cases, no.
Thus, allowing priests to marry doesn't solve the problem of sexual abuse by priests, it simply opens the possibility for more lives (their wives and children) to be gravely impacted by the disordered and uncontrolled sexual urges of the offending priests.
The actual modality of the
The actual modality of the abuse crisis in 80% of the cases is ephebophilia of a homosexual nature.
"The actual modality of the
"The actual modality of the abuse crisis in 80% of the cases is ephebophilia of a homosexual nature."
Thank you for the statistic. This supports my main point: that allowing the clergy to marry is not likely to have a significant impact on the child sexual abuse situation.
It certainly would have an
It certainly would have an effect by enlarging the pool of applicants for the seminaries to choose from while at the same time making it less likely men with red flags in the seminary will be ordained to fill holes in the diocesan churches!
So you were "inspired" by
So you were "inspired" by Jack Kennedy, a fake Catholic? That tells me all I need to know about you and your commitment to the Faith. It's good you left.
Thanks, Gardy!!! Hang in
Thanks, Gardy!!! Hang in there...
Wow! H. White. You must have
Wow! H. White. You must have been sitting and waiting to respond so quickly you missed the whole point of the interview and twisted it to your strange reference to "Marxist-feminists". It's been a long while since I heard that language--ask a young person what it means and you'd get blank look. Do you really think there are still "Marxist' lurking in the dark recesses of old convents waiting to pounce. Although I suspect you're not alone in this--your patron Cardinal Rode must think the same thing. He's the great initiator of this inquisition--actually it's very similar to what would actually happen in a real Marxist's state.
Yo, I am 21 and I know
Yo, I am 21 and I know exactly what it means. see The Second Sex by Simone d Beauvoir. As for the rest of your appeal to ignorance, which is fallacy, I can just say this: liberation theology. QED
I known a lot of nuns over
I known a lot of nuns over the last 5o years. I have yet to meet one who is a Marxist.
WOW! "Marxist-feminists"!
WOW! "Marxist-feminists"! and "communities abandoned Christ and His Holy Church in exchange for tired 1960s-style political radicalism"!
Who have you been talking to? My friends who "left" the convent told me that they were doing so because they wanted to better minister to the poor and underprivileged. Rather than teach in a "safe" parochial school or work in a CYO center, they went into the inner city to less-than-safe schools and crisis centers. I have two cousins who left their order when the Bishop started assigning their highly educated fellow-nuns as "housekeepers" because pastors were complaining that they couldn't find ones who didn't answer back. So, instead, they worked regular jobs "during the day", and then spent their "off" time, in with people who they otherwise would have never met. They are still "in community". And follow those opportunities that they believe God sends them.
Who are you to call them "not faithful to Christ"?
well that strategy really got
well that strategy really got them more fellow sisters. Do you write for Saturday Night Live?
Really? Of all the women
Really? Of all the women religious I know, and I include both nuns and sisters, the ones who left community, never felt they were forced out by political views. Especially of the “Marxist-Feminist” viewpoint. In fact, many of those who you might refer to in this demeaning term did not even enter community until after Vatican II. Many that left felt that Vatican II did not move fast enough or far enough. It appears that Mr.(?) White wants sisters back in the schools working free like they did in the years before Vatican II. The sisters that taught me in the 50’s and 60’s never knew what a full cupboard was, they lived on starvation rations. I know of times when each sister was issued a half slice of bread in the morning and told that is all there was to eat for the whole day and the day after. When my mother would bring down a gallon or two of turkey soup after Thanksgiving, that would be the only turkey they saw. I know that when a hindquarter of venison would show up outside of hunting season, a Mass would be offered for the poacher who provided it, but it was received with great thanks and eaten with joy. No, the sisters who taught were treated poorly by the parishes, primarily because the parishes did not realize they were very self-supporting, and they received little if any wages for their work in the schools. At least the nuns who lived in monasteries usually had farms to support themselves. Mr.(?) White, I think you live in a dream world. Do not be so unkind to women religious, you expose you lack of understanding of the Catholic faith by your unkind words.
Dear H White, Nonsense.
Dear H White,
Nonsense. Exactly which nuns have failed to remain true to Christ and their religion? Perhaps they are responding to Christ's Holy Spirit and you are blind to that reality.
JR
Amen H. White. And there
Amen H. White. And there are/were many who stayed and greatly suffered at the hands of the so called "magisterium of nuns" who've been running things as they see fit. And they are/were obedient and so would not complain for the most part. I hope their voices were heard.
Spot on H. White. There is
Spot on H. White. There is righteous anger and hurt by those who were faithful to Christ and His Church, and then there is the demonic upset because your new age picnic is being finally exposed.
I believe people are not
I believe people are not demonic. However, the closest I've seen to demonic anger and hatred was the violent actions and slander of very religious and righteous conservative Catholics and their monied organizations in the early 80's and 90's that mercilessly ranted and railed against Vatican II.
They circulated hit lists of people to pick on, fire, defame, publicly and privately mock and humiliate and occaisionally physically threaten. They crashed seminars, workshops. retreats interupting, shouting and name calling. Saying those they did not like were doing the work of Satan when actualy the opposite seemed much more true.
If any people were ever following a demonic spirit they were and evidently still are
I'm not a nun H. White so let
I'm not a nun H. White so let me clearly state your comment is not only wicked with clear intent is to hurt the Sisters who remained faithful to Vatican II. It is a lieing load of crap.
What does it mean to be
What does it mean to be faithful to Vatican II? Do you mean faithful to what Vatican II said, or just faithful to the "spirit of Vatican II"? No, it's not the same thing to most people who purport to operate according to the "spirit of Vatican II".
For example, nuns who don't wear habits anymore will vaguely say that since Vatican II women religious are not subject to such rules and regulations. When in reality the Council's Decree on the Adaptation and Renewal of Religious Life stated that:
"The religious habit, an outward mark of consecration to God, should be simple and modest, poor and at the same becoming. In addition it must meet the requirements of health and be suited to the circumstances of time and place and to the needs of the ministry involved. The habits of both men and women religious which do not conform to these norms must be changed." (Perfectae Caritatis 17)
This is the statement of Vatican II regarding the habits of religious, yet nowhere do we find anything about habits not being required anymore, which is what you're led to believe the vast majority of the time, with the assurance of something along the lines of "Vatican II changed all that".
Habits? Who the hail cares?
Habits? Who the hail cares? Jesus did not wear a habit. Mary did not wear a habit. Habits the first nuns wore were not habits at all. They were everyday wear contemporary to the times.
It's the soul of the human being in love with his or her God inspired to give her/his life for that love and spread that love to others that counts.
Rubrics are shallow. The Spirit of Vatican II never was hung up at the shallow end of the pool. Judge not the book by its cover.
Clueless.
Clueless.
Wild, silly and maybe a sick
Wild, silly and maybe a sick comment.
H. White, I appreciate that
H. White, I appreciate that your experience may be different from my own, but I wonder if attributing the decline in women religious to progressives chasing out conservatives is an explanation rooted more in convenience (i.e. supporting a certain assumption) than in universal reality. I know many priests and women religious who left their orders in the 70s and the majority of them are actually very progressive. It could be equally valid to suggest that women left when they came to see their lack of a voice in the direction of the institutional church as an injustice that they could not accept(it would be wonderful for some of those who left their orders who might visit this forum to share their reasons for leaving- maybe I'm wrong).
In regards to the suggestion that the perceived secularization of religious orders is in some way the result of women not being faithful to "Christ and their religion", I would invite you to revisit the Gospels. Many of the the changes that came out of Vatican II were the result of revisiting the original sources of our faith and the religious orders (resourcement). Jesus situated his own mission in mostly secular terms, "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to bring glad tidings (Gospel) to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free, and to proclaim a year acceptable to the Lord" (Lk 4:18-19)... later Jesus'entrusts his disciples (this means all of us including women religious) with continuing this proclamation. Furthermore, many scholars have suggested that the divide between secular and religious would have been unknown to Jesus and his Jewish contemporaries - the division is a modern convention not a sacred reality.
It's not unlikely that Sisters Dorothy Stang, Dorothy Kasel, Ita Ford and Maura Clark (the latter three who were murdered 30 years ago last Thursday) were accused of being Marxists, radicals and feminists. Fr. Jon Sobrino whose Jesuit community was murdered reflected on his friends' death two weeks after they had been killed (I believe the book is called "Companions of Jesus"). In it, Sobrino responded to these types of accusations that their tired radical, political and secular style was not faithful to Christ and his Church. His response read something like this, "while our faithfulness to the Church has at times been questioned, we have seen that my brothers were in fact, the most faithful to the Church in that they embodied the 'greatest love' to which Christ calls us- they gave their lives for others". Like the Jesuits, these women embodied the greatest love. The ultimate religious expression is love (not faithfulness to religious conventions), love is a responsive reality that inevitably will take people into the secular sphere - the ordinary place where people are living, suffering and struggling to love (Jesus died a political death and was engaged in the ordinary reality of people's lives). We can only hope that Bishop Tobin and other leaders truly hear the hurt and anger of others, if they don't hear the women, they will not be able to offer a loving response (whatever that might be)- how can you love and respond to someone that you don't know and hear?
Are you a women religious who
Are you a women religious who has experienced this hurt and anger? It would have been helpful to know that and to hear your personal experience rather than to read what amounts to a wholesale indictment of women religious and their congregations, the majority of whom do not fit your characterization at all. As a woman religious myself, I can assure you that my congregation does not fit your profile at all. We are ecclesial women of the Gospel and of Jesus Christ who carry HIS radical message of active inclusive love forward in our lives and works.
Ah, always good to get
Ah, always good to get something off one's chest.
Hope you feel better.
"Marxist-feminists" ... Let
"Marxist-feminists" ...
Let me begin by noting that I am male, and somewhat superannuated, such that I remember Vatican II as current news, and John XXIII as an extraordinarily marvellous and humble pastor of us all. One more Italian Pope turned out to be anything but.
When I read diatribes like yours, sir, I am left with the impression that like many others you do not really understand Marx and what he wrote. I sometimes (as when looking at America's current national income distribution) think Marx was 99.9% correct in his diagnosis of the ills of Capitalism, yet I am firmly persuaded he was 99.9% wrong about the remedy for the problem. When you speak of Marxist sisters, I think you are reflecting stereotypes more than knowledge, or else choosing to redefine the word to the point of meaninglessness. If you think about it, early Christian communities and most religious communities, held/hold property in common, rather than in severalty, but that does not make them political Marxists.
All the sisters I have had the privilege of meeting in the last 70 years were the sort of people that I would wish more of us were.
My reply to H. White: I left
My reply to H. White: I left my order, which I loved, in the 70´s. Why did I leave? It was a long process. When I was a young sister, we used to meditate each week on our Constitution. Our constitution said that our "Reason for Being" (Charism) was Christian education with a special love for the poor. I was made into a math teacher and taught in an upper middle class school. I meditated each week on the fact that I found no poor there, and what I was teaching had nothing to do with the Gospel, I could have been an athiest and it wouldn´t have made any difference. What did I teach have to do with Christian Education??? I finally couldn´t stand the contradictions any more and went to my superiors, they sent me down to Mexico. I had studied German for my degree in mathematics, but was not given any classes in Spanish, and knew nothing about Latin American culture, but when I arrived in Mexico I found poor people , and my concience was at peace even though I couldn´t speak with them. Slowly I learned Spanish by listening to the people around me, but my superiors instead of letting me grow into the Mexican culture as a simple religious, put me in charge of a large Mexican convent where no one spoke English and I spoke very poor Spanish, they then began to direct the convent from the US, no understanding the cultural differences and needs. I tried to explain, but the superiors knew more, Then I found the Latin American Bishops document published after their meeting at Medellin, and for me it was liberating, all that they said was what I had reflected on all those weeks when I was meditation on the Constitution of my Order. I sent a copy of the document to the Superiors in the US, but they didn´t even read it, and I had no other possiility but to leave the group and follow the indications of the Latin American Bishops. This is why I left religious life. What I have found? a difficult life, What I have learned? I know what Christian Education is, and I have a love for the poor, what I was looking for all those searching years. You should not make rash judgements, it isn´t Christian to do so. What does this have to do with marxism???
H. White seems to have held
H. White seems to have held on to an anger that needs to be resolved. My experience in religious life these 64 years has been one of transition from strict observance where I loved teaching because of the opportunity to become aware of those around me and to talk about why Jesus left His Spirit with us. When Vatican II came along I took part in block meetings that enlightened us to come together - priests, sister, brothers and all people to learn more about the message of love that Jesus asked us to bring to one another. That Spirit and love is deep in my heart as I care for little children and visit the homes of the poor. Jesus encouraged us to love everyone especially the poor. What we wear could never cover for the needs of those around us. I pray that angry persons may meet up with some of us who value our transformation May they direct their energies toward love and not hate.
The Vatican spins it and John
The Vatican spins it and John Allen writes it.
Gotta go along to get along.
Gotta go along to get along. Or..........Beep! Beep! ACCESS DENIED Beep! Beep!
John Allen is a
John Allen is a sensationalist. Unfortunately opposite vew are never allowed by NCR
Refreshing! Still, the
Refreshing!
Still, the visitation of all the apostolic communities of women in the US was triggered by something or someone. Was it someone's sour grapes! Or, was it JPII bishops in the US looking for one more control lever?
Or worse, is it a worm or a cabal that has convinced others in the curia that silence the women religious then the Dogmatic and Pastoral constitutions of the Church can be 'reformed' back to the Council of Trent. We have already seen how easily influenced the Curia was to the likes of Marciel before the Curia 'discovered' his true nature.
Good questions, Russell.
Good questions, Russell. Given in this article: Archbishop Tobin seeks reconciliation and dialogue, acknowledges the complexity that makes up the institutional church in the USA and disclaims any punitive "endgame" for this particular investigation (he knows nothing about the parallel one re the LCWR). Motivation as to why it was actually begun is not addressed however. You touched on some. The first commentator in this queue did the same. I submit there are more, especially when connected to the "sour grapes" issue. I'd phrase that suggestion in this manner: "Was it someone's sour grapes backed by much moola or the pledging of same?"
"Opportunity for response"
"Opportunity for response" is for me a KEY phrase! These words have in my opinion been neglected not only
in the Church, by Church Officials, but also by the Religious Congregations themselves among their own sisters.
I have been a victim of this so-called "SECRECY" in my life as a Religious Sister. The true basic needs of a sister is not always considered by the Superiors in the Church or Religious Congregation or in the particular Community in which the Sisters live and work. This has been a cause of intense suffering for me, as well as for many, many Sisters in the past "authoritarianism" in these Sacred Institutions. There is too much judgement, and false judgments at that, often made upon hear-say and tattle tales among certain power seeking persons in these same institutions. This may sound judgmental on my part! It is, in fact, just stating the facts of the situation that has been set up by too many "canonical laws" These Laws often protect the institution, and certainly not the individual persons who are exploited and made into scapegoats and victims of the "System" of comunication that is too often secretive.
It is my prayer that as much as I have personally suffered at the hands and words of Superiors and Church Officials who had no concern about my spiritual, intellectual, emotional as well as physical situations, that the Grace of God in the Holy Spirit and the Christ Jesus to whom my life has been consecrated to the glory of the Father. that this life and works "ORA et LABORE" have not been for naught. It is precisely this kind of life that is made "holy" or is it "WHOLE" in the following of Christ in the Gospel Truth of the Word made flesh.
At this time of Advent is the most pertinent time to life, pray and wait for a "NEW COMING of Christ" through the life and purity of the Virgin Mary.
The Church is being purified, so are the Congregations and Religious Orders in the Church! And, also the indivisdual persons, whether they know it or not! Purification leads to Illumination of the TRUE and REAL LIGHT which can be so small that it can illumine the darkest night, while the blaring light of the elitst often only blinds everyone for lack of simple Understanding and Wisdom which comes through experience and love as Our Lord Jesus Christ himself taught and lived!
We need to get of our "hight horses" and bow down to be borne by a simple "donkey" . . . don't you think that this is true?
Actually this is the WAY that makes Saints! Being in the world but not of it! with eyes of the heart focused upon the only Way which is that of Christ Jesus! the Light, the Life and the Love of my soul and spirit!
respectfully,
Shestelle
"You don’t want people to
"You don’t want people to feel like they’ve been punched but they don’t know what it was all about." I dare to say the punching has already occurred and no one still knows what it was all about (except fear on the part of Rome).
The whole thing was "disrespectful of what women religious in America have accomplished". And contrary to Tobin, I think there will be punitive measures taken, because that's all we have seen from Rome lately. Those guys just don't like intelligent, independent, deep thinking women, who might have a different take on what it means to live as a Catholic Christian.
Reconciliation through
Reconciliation through dialogue, is what gives me hope, that sisters in America are not judge with condemnation but charity and justice. praying that final end results will not turn like that of 9/11 beyond repairs!
It seems to me the basic
It seems to me the basic question is WHY would sisters in the USA be singled out for judgment at all? Motivation is key to the whole mess created by this Vatican office.
I am hearted by the scope and
I am hearted by the scope and replies as cited within this conversation with Archbishop Tobin! Thank you John Allen for inviting and reporting this dialogue concerning the Visitation and its results.
Fine time to think about
Fine time to think about "reconciliation." Will "Rome" fall again before it realizes that its armor has chinks in it? Next time take care of your own problems before you seek to find those of others.
At last a bit of openness
At last a bit of openness from Rome. Let's hope and pray he can make sure that American women religious can read the report that will be written about us--and that we can respond.
I don't think this visitation
I don't think this visitation is going to increase vocations. If I was thinking of joining a community I would think twice. Rome is acting like the Inquisition and that kind of thinking went out with Vatican II. The patriachy of the Roman Catholic Church is what is really on trial here.
Why any modern, American
Why any modern, American woman would want to become a nun today is a mystery to me. Imagine being evaluated where you work without knowing the results. You wouldn't know where you stand; it would be very jarring.
The problem today is there
The problem today is there are too many modern women in "religious" life. What is needed are women who are true to the Faith -- all of it, not just the parts they agree with -- rather than modern women.
Post new comment