The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
PDF versionVatican officials, US women religious meet
Jul. 06, 2010
Members of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious march through Woldenberg Riverside Park in New Orleans for a prayer service to preserve the wetlands. The walk was part of the conference's 2009 annual gathering. (CNS/Clarion Herald/Frank J. Methe)
A Vatican doctrinal investigation of the largest leadership organization for U.S. women religious appears to have been complicated by the group’s support last March of health care legislation opposed by the U.S. bishops.
In meetings with Vatican officials last April, the Leadership Conference of Women Religious repeatedly fielded questions from Vatican officials about its support for the legislation despite the fact that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops had argued the bill would allow federal funding for abortions.
The Leadership Conference, along with a number of other Catholic groups, including the Catholic Health Association, disagreed with the bishop’s interpretation of the legislation, saying it did not allow for federal funding of abortions.
Last March, in the final days of a highly politicized health care debate in Congress, the Leadership Conference offered support to a Senate-backed House bill that eventually passed 219-212.
The Leadership Conference supported the legislation, saying it would bring health care coverage to an additional 30 million people.
President Obama signed the measure, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, on March 23, leaving a visible rift between the bishops and women religious. The issues involved now appear to have gone beyond specific health care legislation to include the proper use of church authority, who can speak to moral and political issues, and the scope of constitutional rights of vowed religious.
Elements in these thorny issues have been thrown into the mix of the ongoing doctrinal assessment by Vatican officials of the U.S. women religious leadership, an internal Leadership Conference document indicates.
The Leadership Conference of Women Religious is an association of the leaders of congregations of Catholic women religious in the United States and claims more than 1,500 members, representing about 95 percent of the 68,000 U.S. women religious.
Cardinal William J. Levada (CNS/Reuters/Tony Gentile)It was in February 2009 that the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, headed by U.S. Cardinal William Joseph Levada, sent a letter to the conference, announcing the doctrinal assessment. Levada cited Vatican doctrinal concerns with the conference dating back to 2001.
NCR: February 3-16, 2012
Subscribe to NCR to get all the news and special features that aren't always available online. In this issue:
- US News: Bishops Host Conference on Immigration
Conference fields advocates' questions on law, policy
- Special Section: Deacons. Serving as parish administrator; roles of wives; and more
- Study: Black Catholics are more engaged
New study by Notre Dame researcher about parish involvement in America
The Levada letter set no timetable for further discussions or resolution of the issues involved. The outcome of the assessment could have a significant impact on the future of the conference and, in turn, the leadership of U.S. women religious communities, possibly leading to Vatican demands for new methods of communication among women religious or even new structures of leadership.
However serious the outcome of the doctrinal assessment could be, it has received relatively little public exposure in large part because the process has been overshadowed by a far more public Vatican investigation of U.S. women religious congregations, which was initiated two months before and is now in the second year of a three-year process.
This second Vatican inquiry, officially called an apostolic visitation, was announced in December 2008 and involves the nation’s apostolic religious communities. This investigation is being carried out by the Vatican’s Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, headed by Slovenian Cardinal Franc Rodé.
When Rodé’s congregation first announced the study of U.S. women religious communities, it cited as reason falling numbers within them and a need to determine their “quality of life.”
Whatever the Vatican intentions, many U.S. women religious have seen this probe as an affront. They say they were never consulted, were never involved in its planning or execution, and will not be allowed an opportunity to refute allegations before the report is passed along to Vatican officials for consideration and possible action.
As a result of these objections, some religious communities have not been fully compliant with the study, although there have been no reports that communities singled out for personal site visits have been less than receptive. The apostolic visitation is now in its third phase, which involves the visitation of between 80 and 100 religious communities.
Meanwhile, the Leadership Conference of Women Religious has been tightlipped about the Vatican probe into its conduct. Asked by NCR for information on the Vatican study, the conference issued a short statement confirming the dates it had met with church officials, while adding that it has been cooperating with them, answering all questions regarding its “practices and policies.” The conference confirmed it had met with Vatican officials in Rome in April 2009 and April 2010, and with church officials in November 2009 in Washington.
Once informed of the Vatican doctrinal assessment in March 2009, the conference informed its members, sharing with them the cardinal’s letter and their initial response. NCR obtained copies of those letters at the time.
According to Levada’s letter, the Vatican study became necessary after the conference failed to respond adequately to concerns expressed by the Vatican in 2001. The Levada letter cited three areas of doctrinal concern: women’s ordination, the primacy of the Catholic faith, and homosexuality.
Levada designated Toledo, Ohio, Bishop Leonard P. Blair, a member of the U.S. bishops’ Committee on Doctrine, as the lead bishop in the study.
Following the Leadership Conference officers’ meeting with Vatican officials last April, it sent out a letter to its membership, updating them on the conversations. NCR obtained a copy of that letter.
Sr. Marlene Weisenbeck, president of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (NCR photo/Thomas C. Fox)Three of four current officers met with Vatican officials, including Franciscan Sister of Perpetual Adoration Marlene Weisenbeck, the conference’s president; Franciscan Sr. J. Lora Dambroski; and Notre Dame de Namur Sr. Jane Burke. Dominican Sr. Mary Hughes, also on the leadership team, could not attend the meetings.
The conference’s letter informed its members that a meeting the women had April 23 with Levada and members of his staff focused on two topics: the Leadership Conference’s support of the health care reform bill and the status of the doctrinal assessment.
Describing the gathering as “frank and open,” the leadership team wrote that it had insisted at the meeting it does not support abortion, but did support the idea of speaking out on a political issue.
“We clarified that LCWR does not support abortion and that we have made this position clear,” the letter said. “We explained that we feel a moral imperative to see that there is health care coverage for all persons, and that we believe this bill will guarantee that more than 30 million uninsured persons would finally be provided health care.” The letter added: “We were very clear in stating that our actions were not in opposition to the U.S. bishops.”
The Leadership Conference told its membership that Levada was concerned that the organization’s actions “were being interpreted as a public display of disunity within the church and that they undercut the perception of the church as one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic.”
The conference said it responded, speaking of the necessity to be able to exercise “rights, duties, and obligations as citizens.” The letter stated that Levada acknowledged women religious operate in two worlds -- as Catholics and as citizens. However, he insisted that the bishops are the ones who make key decisions in matters of faith and morals.
Addressing the doctrinal assessment, the letter indicated the women expressed surprise as some of the materials requested by the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith “go beyond the scope of a doctrinal assessment.” The letter did not elaborate on what those materials are.
The Vatican requests, the letter stated, caused the women to ask if the process “had moved beyond an assessment and into an investigation of LCWR.”
The letter did not indicate how Levada responded to the question.
Levada told the women, the letter stated, that once Blair sends his final report to the congregation, his assessment will be sent for review to different groups, including “a subcommission, the American cardinals in Rome, and perhaps some others.” Levada explained he will then consult with Rodé and develop a final report that will be presented to Pope Benedict XVI.
Blair’s diocesan director of communications, Sally A. Oberski, said the bishop has a policy of not speaking with the media about the assessment.
According to the letter, the leadership team met the next day, April 24, with Rodé and members of his congregation. Again, Vatican officials queried the women about the conference’s support for the health care legislation.
The meeting moved on to discussions about the apostolic visitation and to a Leadership Conference statement approved at its 2009 national assembly in New Orleans. That statement, “LCWR Call,” was intended to set a five-year course for the organization.
“We discussed at length the LCWR support of the health care bill. The cardinal stated his belief that we cannot defend our position because it was contrary to the bishops,” the letter went on. “We again clarified that we do not support abortion and that we are quite aware that we are citizens of our country who must take action, and we base our actions upon our understanding of all the moral imperatives brought to the table within this particular piece of legislation.”
The letter said Rodé instructed the women that “LCWR cannot declare a pastoral direction since this responsibility belongs to the episcopal conference alone and, he noted, that by our actions we broke unity. We reiterated our view that we do not support abortion and our belief that the moral imperative of providing health care for more than 30 million uninsured was an action we had to support.”
According to the letter, the women noted “some the benefits we have experienced [in the apostolic visitation], including the support and appreciation women religious have received from the public, as well as the opportunity to learn more about the rights and duties of religious within the church. We also noted that the process has caused confusion among our members because neither we nor the U.S. bishops were well-informed about all aspects of the apostolic visitation.”
The letter stated Rodé spoke of “his serious concern over the many congregations that did not complete the entire apostolic visitation questionnaire.”
It stated that a doctrinal congregation staff member, Passionist Fr. Leonello Leidi, reiterated that Mother Mary Clare Millea, in her position as apostolic visitator, “is the vicar of the pope,” and that the actions of some religious communities that did not fully comply in answering visitation questionnaires last year were acting in “open opposition” to Rome.
The letter stated that Leidi spoke of “possible consequences for leaders who may be judged as disobedient.”
The women religious leadership team asked Rodé what he hoped would be the final outcome of the visitation, the letter noted.
“He responded by saying that he understands that women religious have historically worked for migrants and persons who are poor, and acknowledged that we have built schools and hospitals and have provided services to many people. He expressed a desire to get a clear, objective view of religious life as it is lived today and that a focus be placed on values, life in community, prayer, and living the evangelical life.”
The letter stated that the meeting ended with the cardinal making two recommendations: that the Leadership Conference of Women Religious be clear about its position on abortion, and that it invite members to collaborate with the apostolic visitation process.
“He again stated that LCWR has influence and we must use it to support the church and its efforts. He further indicated that he has spoken with Pope Benedict about the apostolic visitation and noted that the pope is concerned and may be making a statement about the process or may ask Cardinal Rodé to issue a statement.”
The letter ended with the leadership team saying it will keep members informed about other aspects of the visit.
[Thomas C. Fox is NCR editor and can be reached at tfox@ncronline.org.]
A complete index of NCR stories about the apostolic visitations of U.S. women religious: the apostolic visitations.
Is there any question that
Is there any question that most women's Religious communities would be well served if they go "non-canonical" and simply become tax exempt non-profit organizations in order to continue their valuable ministries? It is outrageous that power hungry bishops and cardinals are attempting the silencing as well as the punishment of these remarkable women. The power holders in the Church want the assets of these LCWR communities so it also has a money angle. These women are the true disciples of Jesus in word and deed. The hierarchy should be ashamed of themselves and it is up to the millions of lay Catholics around the world to stand up loudly and publicly for the LCWR communities who are being used as scapegoats and diversions from the real crisis the Catholic Church is facing. There is a wide discussion of the criminal liabilities of popes, cardinals and bishops regarding the cover-up and recycling of child abusers. It is not only priests but cardinals and bishops and perhaps a pope or two, who have acted in the very least, irresponsibly and in some cases, perhaps, criminally, in order to do damage control. Protecting the Church's image should never rise above the more important issue, which is protecting the children from abuse. There is no way the LCWR can function in a dysfunctional Vatican system. This is a scenario for total failure and the sooner the LCWR communities separate themselves from the corruption of the Vatican power holders, the sooner they will be able to continue their valuable and vital ministries. It really is time for the great women of the LCWR to sever institutional ties and be free from a system that is imploding from the weight of its' own corruption and decay.
Most institutions sponsored
Most institutions sponsored by U.S. women religious are ALREADY 501c3 non-profits.
"Going non-canonical" will not help those congregations whose sisters work in church related ministries and are at present non-taxable. The minute the order's name is taken out of the Kenedy Directory (which the IRS uses to determine who or what organization is officially "Catholic" and tax-exempt), then these sisters also pay income tax. As I understand it any woman religious who does not work for an "official Catholic" agency listed in that directory pays income tax.
Thank you, Chris Smith. This
Thank you, Chris Smith. This is and has been my thought for quite a while.
The religious women could achieve the same results of their love and commitment to people without the interference of bureaucrats in Rome.
religious women could achieve
religious women could achieve the same results of their love and commitment to people
I thought religious life was about love and commitment to JESUS CHRIST and to HIS CHURCH.
Loretta Shalosky on Jul. 07,
Loretta Shalosky on Jul. 07, 2010.
You stated:
"religious women could achieve the same results of their love and commitment to people
I thought religious life was about love and commitment to JESUS CHRIST and to HIS CHURCH."
--------------------------------------
Yes, Loretta, vows of love and commitment to Jesus Christ and to Jesus Christ who identified himself with the poor, the sick, the imprisoned, the homeless, the hungry, and those lacking clothing.
Jesus said nothing about the "official Church." He said nothing about popes, cardinals, arch/bishops who live a life style that is way above most of the people's incomes. Jesus said nothing about popes who wear shoes that cost more than many of the world's poor would earn in a year. Jesus said nothing about Cardinals and Arch/bishops who wear magna cappas that are 80 yards long,
and bespeak of royality---rather than humble shepherds.
And the reason Jesus said nothing about that is because the Hierarchy AREN'T SUPPOSED TO BE LIVING THAT WAY! They are supposed to go out and among the people, eating what is set before them. Jesus wanted them to live a SIMPLE LIFE-STYLE OF SERVICE----not the rarified life of monarchs.
The Sisters ARE out there to see, listen, speak and serve the 'least' among God's children(the CHURCH). Where are the bishops?
HIS CHURCH is full of people.
HIS CHURCH is full of people.
I so much believe what you do
I so much believe what you do and speak it to the lord a daily.
I agree with your assessment.
I agree with your assessment. So now what do we do to get the laity to stand up against this crap that that the heirarchy is peddling? I am open to ideas so let's hear them. catholic laity has a habit of just walking away. But I think we need to vote these people out through our "voices" and "stopping the money." Everytime we put money in those baskets on Sunday we are giving the heirarchy money to cover up their stupid, unethical behavior towards children that were raped and sodomized.
What would Jesus do???? Certainly not sue these victims in court....
Oh, it's not so cut and dried
Oh, it's not so cut and dried as that. The LCWR is also guilty in regards the treatment of abuse victims, perhaps even more so than the bishops:
http://www.richardsipe.com/Doyle/2009/sexual_abuse_by_nuns.htm
Sam Urfer.... I just read the
Sam Urfer....
I just read the Article by Tom Doyle that you referenced to.
Is this the same Tom Doyle as in Father Thomas Doyle, OP?
I read most of Fr. Tom. OP articles about clerical sexual abuse, but
I missed the one(s) about "sexual abuse by Nuns". Physical abuse? Yes.
Physical abuse was common for the times in any orphanage.. believe me...I don't condone it. I am one of those people who didn't know the abuse among
nuns was "equally or worse" than sexual abuse among priests. I would like
some good hard evidence as has been published about priests. If what you say is true I wonder why Tom Doyle wouldn't make that information available.
I'm very interested in reading it. Would you send it to me" Thank you!
I can be reached at md90ind@gmail.com
I totally agree. In ancient
I totally agree. In ancient and medieval times, the Papacy was part of the political system and provided some benefit so monastic societies. Legally, the Holy See's protection is no longer necessary and, is in fact, an impediment. The LCWR should, of course, work out a way for dwindling houses to consolidate their property and membership but that should have nothing to do with Rome or the bishops.
"The LCWR should, of course,
"The LCWR should, of course, work out a way for dwindling houses to consolidate their property and membership"
The best way for them to do that would be to become Catholic again. Beyond that they could sell their property to the young faithful orders of nuns that are growing rapidly.
The issue of LCWR and
The issue of LCWR and becoming Catholic again is the deeper issue. Opposition to the hierarchy has been going on since the '60's. Society has changed; gender identity and institution of marriage obscured. Never would I doubt the truth and triumph of the Catholic Church. Never ought decisions to become non-canonical be made from. incidences of disunity as now evident. I believe that in this crisis over women religious lies the answer: that religious ARE being called anew by Christ to a far greater than ever before known; a vocation of equality of power.Not through ordination, but by steady influence of women's insight is hardly ever known to male Church leaders, except in the early Church. That insight,if brought to the Vatican in the person of women religious, given unknown to now and clearly and publicly identified positions will eliminate scandal and will transform the Church once again.
Chris The women's religious
Chris The women's religious communities are failing, and going the way of the Shakers. How will leaving the Church help them, except cut them off of the resources they need for their old ages?
The demographic trends are clear: Growth is the only sign of life and the LCWR are actually imploding.
The Vatican is the best friend they have at the moment; their only hope to stop what are self evident self destructive policies.
BTW, what is your evidence that the Vatican aims to take over their assets? W/o evidence your comment is just ignorant ranting.
What resources are these
What resources are these religious orders receiving from the church in caring for their elderly nuns? I am not aware that they receive much. The Church is broke, from paying for the molestation lawsuits, so I would doubt that taking care of the elderly sisters is a top priority. Most orders take care of their own elderly nuns with little, or no help, from the Church.
It's a money grab, pure and simple. The Church wants the assets of the hospital orders, which are valuable. The doctrinaire part of the investigation is mere window dressing, in my humble opinion.
Katie It's a money grab,
Katie It's a money grab, pure and simple.
...
All due respect; you have any evidence or proof that said has happened in the USA?
As for the resources, I'll repeat: The Vatican is unlikely to take assets to turn around and have to support the dying on the vine LCWR orders, who are going the way of the Shakers.
So frankly, your rant that it's a money grab is just plain silly and uninformed.
It is a money grab. Are we
It is a money grab.
Are we forgetting that one, if not the primary reasons we have mandatory celibacy is due to Rome's concern over past property rights being inherited by the children and spouses of married priests, bishops and popes in earlier centuries. It is always about money when dealing with men whose principle concern is power and control for without money they cannot excercise that power and control. It has already been pointed out that the Church is going broke due to damages it has to pay due to the sexual abuse scandals and there is little doubt that a lot more will have to be paid. You bet they would like to get their hands on the money these good women steward so properly on behalf of the people of God, in their service and loyalty to God, for it is to God they are accountable and not the Pope.
David Mapstone
Australia
Mr Mapstone Check the data;
Mr Mapstone Check the data; you can find it on the LCWR web site. That organization has a $9 bn unfunded liability, which they expect to reach $20bn by 2023.
That is, there is no money. The sisters are already broke, even with help from the Hierarchy.
Katie...You are right about
Katie...You are right about everything except the "Church is Broke"
Rome is doing everything to avoid just hat.
Your comment, "except cut
Your comment, "except cut them off of the resources they need for their old ages" truly baffles me. What do you mean by this statement?
The Vatican does nothing to
The Vatican does nothing to support religious communities, they are self supporting. Everybody thinks the parish supports the religious like the parish priest. Wrong. Invite a couple of sisters over for super someday and send home with them a healthy dose of leftovers. Find out that they will be overjoyed to have meals to extend out their meager budget. Too often the sister’s cupboards are truly bare with nothing except air to eat. Don’t tell me how the Vatican supports the women’s religious groups.
St. B. Interesting opinion.
St. B. Interesting opinion. If you bothered to go to the LCWR web site, you'd see that the tab 'programs and resources' include a link to the USSCB's office, the National Religious Retirement Office.
Seems that the Hierarchy and the LCWR are collaborating on covering the unfunded liabilities.
The Hierarchy are the best friends the sisters have to deal with the implosion of their orders.
Umm...the Church does not
Umm...the Church does not care for nor will it be caring for sisters in their old age. Each community is out on its own resources. The Church does not provide any monatary assistance to religious communities. They are self-providing entities. The collection that is taken up yearly for religious communities is taken up in churches, but it is not the Church - meaning the hierarchy/Rome/Bishops/the big "C" - that is providing the money. It is the "church" in the sense of its members - we are the church - that provides that money.
Dear Indy-mlj,you're correct
Dear Indy-mlj,you're correct in saying that the annual collection for elderly religious women and men comes, not from the Church but from the church. Really, the only thing the Church provides is the conduit in the distribution system. In my diocese the big-C does that for their own priests also. With regard to the sisters, however, this once-per-year distribution is not nearly enough. That's why another purely little-c organization (an independent 501-c3 group) has sprung up. You may have heard of it: SOAR. Upon application and approval this group provides grants for specific community needs such as retro-fitting sections of buildings to be handicap accessible, elevators in wings set aside for elderly religious, a handicap-equipped van for transport to and from medical appointments, etc, etc. Without SOAR the yearly collection (which some people and parishes nationally "boycotted" last year let me remind you) would not nearly be enough. With SOAR at least some dire needs can be budgeted....
I don't think that the
I don't think that the hierarchy or the Vatican, is a resource for elderly vowed religious women. They don't support the Sisters financially at all, as far as I know.
Chris Here's some data (not
Chris Here's some data (not usually seen w/ NCR rants!):
AP reported in 2006 that there is an unfunded liability for religious (men and women) of $8.7 bn. That shortfall (thanks to the democraphic implosion of the orders) is expected to reach $20 bn as early as 2023.
Bishops already have an office to deal w/ the growing crisis, and there are collections for retired religious. AP notes that the lack of new members is the main cause of the financial shortfall (think of the Social Security problem on steroids)
The USSCB has an office called the National Religious Retirement Office. From their website "Of 594 religious communities submitting data to the National Religious Retirement Office in 2008, only 27 are adequately funded for retirement; 140 are less than 20 percent funded" They make "An annual per capita distribution to religious institutes based on the number of members age 60 and over"
"Since the first appeal for the Retirement Fund for Religious was conducted in 1988, nearly $557 million in financial support has been distributed to religious communities in the United States. In 2008, the NRRO awarded over $23 million in Direct Care Assistance to 483 religious communities or an average of $653 for every member of a Catholic religious community who is age 70 or older."
Bottom line: The money is already gone. All that the sisters are bequeathing is an immense financial shortfall that someone else will be picking up.
The hierarchy is the best friend that these dying orders have.
Yes, Chris, I believe you are
Yes, Chris, I believe you are absolutely correct in your assessment. When the bishops talk about their authority saying only they set the direction of the Church, they are dead wrong. In their understanding of the church in the modern world, they are about two thousand years out of synch. They still don't seem to comprehend that the People of God are the CHURCH and the SPIRIT works thru them. The entire concept of hierarchy is foreign to the philosophy of Jesus. The concept of being of service to others, to look out for the poor, to feed the hungry, to educate the young and to be Christ-like pretty well describes the actions of the nuns. On the other hand, we have those members of the hierarchy who act like monarchs, who practice an option for the wealthy and well-connected, who close down food centers for the homeless, and who neglect and inflict the young, acting like arrogant narcissists in their attempts to cover up crimes.
The question is who should be investigating whom! It is very clear for anyone with Christian eyes to see, the CHURCH is totally in support of the nuns, and we all need to pray that the hierarchy sees the writing on the wall by the SPIRIT and gives up its man-made power-grab and its devious intrusion into the life of the Christian CHURCH. Let's return to the community of believers that Jesus initiated and remove these hierarchs from the institution. Jesus had NO place for them, and we should not either!
You bring up a few things:
You bring up a few things: 1)"It is clear for anyone w/Christian eyes to see, the CHURCH is totally in support of the nuns." Not so, those who live their faith with the worldview of "pray, pay, blindly obey" are NOT in support of the nuns. 2)"The People of God are the Church and the SPIRIT works thru them." Yes, yes, yes. Even in what's revered as "tradition" there is such a thing as SENSUS FIDELIS that shapes the life of the institutional church. However, the People of God also includes the hierarchy and there's the rub... Nothing is ever simple, easy or changes quickly. You also mention the working of the Spirit and therein is the hope. We must remember from the very beginning the Spirit moved over chaos to make possible all creation as we know it. After Pentecost is really the time of the Spirit. Chaos is where She works best. It's true as you said, "the Spirit works through them (them being the entire People of God", not just one segment. There is hope. When the smoke clears things will be different. They will not; they cannot return to what was a hundred years ago. The only questions are those of time and structure.... not small questions.
Thank you, Joan, for making
Thank you, Joan, for making me think! From where I stand, looking with 'Christian' eyes, it is not possible to accept the concept of hierarchy; Jesus never did! We are all one, in the view of Jesus. So, those who think that the hierarchy is in some way ABOVE the lay believers, are not in synch with the thinking of Jesus. Perhaps with the grace of the Spirit, they will be able to join the People of God along with those members of the current hierarchy. An individual cannot be in opposition to the philosophy and thought of Jesus and remain in the People of God. They may think they are, but 'thinking' does not make it so. The very idea of 'hierarchy' is un-Christian. Because of early indoctrination, there are some who still believe what they were taught as children. Paul reminded us that as we mature, it is time to 'put away the things of a child' and take on the responsibility of an adult. All competent and authentic scholarly research points to the conclusion that there is nothing in the establishment of a 'hierarchy' that has anything even remotely related to the philosophy of Jesus, the Christ. God bless the good nuns and give them courage and wisdom to continue their adventure with Jesus. Theirs is the kingdom of God.
How is the hierarchy
How is the hierarchy un-Christian, Jesus Christ ordained the Apostles to be the priests of the Church and he appointed St. Peter to be in charge and it was upon St. Peter that the Church was built. The hierarchy was formed. What is so wrong in having some respect in the men, the priests, who consecrate the bread and wine into the body and blood of Jesus Christ, because of them, the Church lives on.
Romano So explain the
Romano So explain the exalted state of the Apostles, who went out to hire the proto-deacons to minister to the faithful so the Apostles could preach? Explain how different Apostles led the Church in India, Antioch, Rome, etc.
Thanks
Defend our women I believe
Defend our women
I believe the day is coming when we, the body of Christ, will have to defend the sacred congregations of female religious from the hounds of the Vatican. I encourage all good Catholics to prepare for this day. Begin to associate yourself in a closer more intimate fashion with the faithful women who have served your Church, your family and your children in so honorable a fashion over the last two thousand years. They are about to feel a need of our support as they have not in many years.
Perhaps it is time to give
Perhaps it is time to give our Catholic donations to these women and support our parishes and diocese with only minimal contributions or our time, money and talents. The Bishops have decided that they are not the humble servants of the People of God but rather their royal masters. They are not servants of Christ but are servants of man made structure. The nuns they are investigating on the other hand ARE the servants of the People of God. We have a horrible leadership problem. Time to abandon them to their own delusion of magisterial royalty.
My we gain the grace of God through our service to Him. There is no grace in obedience to sinful clericalism. Secularism is less a problem then is clericalism.
Peace,
R. Dennis Porch, MD
Doc, Perhaps had these
Doc,
Perhaps had these congregations of sisters not abandoned their community living for apartments, their habits for pantsuits, and focused on Catholic prayer rather than walking in labyrinths, they might now be attracting new vocations rather than dying on the vine. And they would have plenty of support from the faithful.
Thank you . Pray for that
Thank you . Pray for that nuns and their so called supporters
Thank you, Chris. You are
Thank you, Chris. You are right on target. It is time we support our sisters. I suggest we begin by writing Cardinal Levada abd Cardinal Rode and express our upset over the continued effort to suppress the voice of women religious. Let's flood these men with so many letters they will be up to their eyeballs with supportive words. Also, money talks. We MUST stop putting money in the collection plate because it is only going to pay lawsuits of wounded victims of pedophilia.
Thank you Chris Smith for you
Thank you Chris Smith for you insightful comments. Just follow the money and the power structure. I agree that the tme for the LCWR to cast off the net and weight of a male corrupt system that is opperating on fear.
It is a sad time...
Yikes, maybe this is why
Yikes, maybe this is why Europe has embraced secularity! Based on the article above, it appears that the Curia wants the USCCB to become a political party -- vote the way the bishops say to vote. The questions as described above fly in the face of Gaudium et Spes.
I hope that someone explains to the Curia that the disunity over health care legislation resides in the bishops of the USCCB overstepping their vocation into the vocation of the laity.
Rhode's remark about pastoral direction belonging to the bishops conference is interesting. It would seem that the Curia is re-empowering the conference. However, to leave out the obligation of the bishops, singularly and in conference, which is to consult the laity especially as it regards a pastoral direction impairs Rhode's intent. Perhaps, had the bishops in the USCCB done a better job of consulting the laity they would have been reminded of the limits of their own vocation and supported the laity in theis thus strengthening unity.
In no way does Rhode's remarks assist Archbishop Francis of Chicago in his leadership of the USCCB.
And Francis George is one of
And Francis George is one of the inside men of the Vatican. So please don't think he is not on Rode's side. Because he most definitely is on the Pope's side. The people celebrated when George left Oregon and came to Chicago to put us in line with Rome. Thank you Pope JPII!:O Another tactical move to make sure we all go back to the church as it was before Vatican II. Anyone who disagrees with this guy,cardinal George, will feel his wrath, believe me.
I am hoping and praying that he leaves Chicago soon and quits punishing the good priests and the faithful laity while coddling the sex abusers. What a sham that guy is...does not deserve one ounce of our respect! Of course the Vatican has so stuffed the heirachy with reactionary conservatives we will most likely get someone even worse than George! What can the laity do? A lot but the laity are afraid to rock the proverbial boat. Personally, I think the Holy Spirit is alive and well and trying to get us to do just that...rock the boat!
It's obvious that the Sisters
It's obvious that the Sisters have dwindled in number and drifted way to the left. The only young nuns I see are foreign-born. Not sure whether this trends exists world - wide. Once a year we have a Retired Religious Collection and the average age of sisters is well into the '60's, with many more sisters over the age of 80 than under the age of 30. In other words there are not enough younger working nuns to support those who have retired. I think Rome would have been better off not pursuing some of these subjects publicly in what is obviously being perceived as a negative "visitation." Rome needs to be more concerned with the aging of Priests world-wide, and what the parish situation vis-a-vis priest staffing is going to look like in another generation.
The sisters haven't drifted
The sisters haven't drifted to the left--they are right where they have always been, in the trenches caring for people and spreading the real message of Jesus. It is the Church, particularly the hierarchy, which is moving to the right, back to a sixteenth century authoritarian attitude which is strictly about doctrine and dogma and has no time or patience for Jesus' teachings about love, sharing, and forgiveness. The American Church for three decades after Vatican II was alive and growing, but now it seems that our fearless leaders are doing everything in their power to turn it into another France or Italy, where everyone is Catholic but less than 10% of the people actually practice their faith.
Please. If one believes the
Please.
If one believes the Church to be strictly about doctrine and dogma, then one does not understand the Church.
A few clarifications:
1) One would hope that the Vatican would not have to make doctrine or dogma an issue at the forefront due to a lack of disregard for it. Sadly, the American women clergy and American laity (and in some cases, clergy) seem to ignore it completely, and thus must be reined in. This shouldn't be an issue, but is. One cannot disobey or contradict explicit teaching and then get angry that that teaching gets brought up. If one simply did what is correct (because the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit) in the first place, we wouldn't even be talking about this.
2) "Love, sharing, and forgiveness" cannot ever contradict definitive and authoritative Church teaching. Period.
3) The "American Church?" I don't understand. The American Church does not exist -- we are all one Church. That is the problem of how V2 was implemented. The Church was, and is, not growing, except in traditionalist parishes. Furthermore, the Church was being led off-track by individualist bishops, priests, and laity.
I love Vatican II, what I do not love in any way is a blatant disregard for Jesus' teaching that comes through the Church. If one is unwilling to accept that teaching, perhaps Catholicism will not fill his idea of spiritual fulfillment because that will not change.
Dear Anonymous, at the outset
Dear Anonymous, at the outset of your comments you make the case that the Church is not strictly about "dogma and doctrine". However, each and every statement that follows indicates your adherence to those very things as constitutive of "the Church". This is true of even your final statement that "Jesus' teaching ... comes through the Church". In your view, where does Scripture; the Word of God; the Good News - especially the New Testament (Gospels, Acts, Epistles, Revelations) fit in? In my perception these form the bedrock of "The Church."
Dear Joan Krebs, If, in your
Dear Joan Krebs,
If, in your perception, "Scripture; the Word of God; the Good News - especially the New Testament (Gospel, Acts, Epistles, Revelations [sic]" form the "bedrock" of the Church, it might interest you to be reminded that there was a group of men in the 16th century which argued the EXACT same thing. You might have heard of them: the Protestant Reformers?
Of course, you probably already know that one of the very NT epistles you cite, namely 1 Timothy 3:15, explicity states what is the "pillar and bullwark of the Truth": the Church. So it is the Church, founded on the confession of St. Peter, that is the bedrock of the Scriptures - not the other way around.
Dear Joan, Thank you for your
Dear Joan,
Thank you for your response. A few comments.
"each and every statement that follows indicates your adherence to those very things as constitutive of "the Church"."
They are certainly constitutive, but not exhaustively, of the One True Church, the Catholic Church. If you do not believe this, I suggest, as I did in my previous post, that you find spiritual nourishment (as it is in your mind) elsewhere.
"This is true of even your final statement that "Jesus' teaching ... comes through the Church"."
I thought that to be Catholic was to believe this (beyond the technical definition of baptized, etc.).
"In your view, where does Scripture; the Word of God; the Good News - especially the New Testament (Gospels, Acts, Epistles, Revelations) fit in? In my perception these form the bedrock of "The Church.""
Correct. The Scripture gave rise to the Church. The Scripture is the basis for our Mass and almost all the dogma and doctrine of the Church.
Catholicism is about the Bible and Sacred Tradition. If one rejects one of those two, I don't understand why that person would voluntarily label themselves Catholic.
This fits into the larger issue -- if these women religious groups calling themselves Catholic followed the teachings of the Church, there would be no problem and the Vatican would not have to make dogma and doctrine the forefront. I don't think anyone wants it to be. But that will always remain a big issue until organizations that are allegedly Catholic show that they actually are.
I agree James.
I agree James.
James, I agree with you
James, I agree with you 100%!!!!
I agree with the general view
I agree with the general view of your comment - The majority of religious women seem to have grasped honestly and sincerely the intent of the Gospel and Vatican II and made decisions to live that out. It is my view that the Papal/Curial leadership, starting with John Paul II, has failed in this same task, motivated perhaps out of fear of the unknown and loss of traditional power status, choosing instead the familiar language and images of tradition, including an absolute centralized authority.
Until the church develops a new understanding of shared authority among all it's members, we can expect to see many more acts of authoritarian behavior from the church leadership - globally and locally.
Divine authority CAN'T BE
Divine authority CAN'T BE shared.
No matter what religion you belong to (I belong to none myself) you join to submit to its theory of what divine commandments people have no entitlement to question are,The authority of God is by nature completely centralized.If you're not going to follow a hierarchy you therefore don't belong in their religion.The Church leadership must continue to speak for the authority Catholicism is defined by believing it to possess,and those who disagree are the ones who must change or leave.
There are plenty of young US
There are plenty of young US born nuns and there are many growing religious communities. You will not read about them in the NCR because they are faithful Catholics. But you can look them up. Some examples are the Dominicans of Ann Arbor, the Apostles of the Interior Life of Lawrence Kansas and many others.
The future for faithful nuns is very bright. But you are right in that the older orders who drifted away from the church are dying. As is always the case.
No matter what the USCCB or
No matter what the USCCB or the Vatican say, each individual has an obligation to their own conscience. The medieval business of mind control is not a way to keep the church intact.
I agree but what about the
I agree but what about the consciences of Pope Benedict and Cardinal Rode? Aren't they as well entitled to follow their consceinces as the leaders of the church?
It seems to me that there needs to be some intellectual honesty here. Let's face it. There is a very strong disagreement over core Catholic doctrine between these siters of LCWR and the official church teaching. Most of these sisters support Roe v Wade, most support women's ordination, most support same sex relationships and most no longer believe in the Catholic Church in the way that the church has taught for 2000 years, including the SVC.
Ok. Now, it is time to move on and stop playing these mind games. You can't pretend that you are part of an institutional church that you love to loathe. Attacking her leaders, working against the bishops on key issues, making unnecessary statements, escorting women into abortion clinics, encouraging women to have an abortion at a Catholic hospital are not signs of religious comunities who are trying to work wtihin a Catholic framework. It really sounds like there is a war.
We belong to an hierarchial church. She is what she is and if any congregation wants to remain relevant to this institution, regardless of its concerns and misgivings, it has to work within the framework that it currently operates out of and from there work for authentic reform.
Old institutions don't change overnight. They take hundreds of years. A lot of bloggers online think that just because they might be right that the church should change NOW. Whatever happened to prayer?
Well, actually the 'American'
Well, actually the 'American' Church or the Church in the United States which is in union with the Archbishop of Rome is an actual entity. It is considered a regional Church. Regional Churches are recognized by the fact that there is a conference of bishops that co-ordinates things of the region and represents the region is some fashion to the Archbishop of Rome. For instance the conference of bishops (USCCB) in the U.S. issues guidelines for the exercise of prudential judgement in the US elections, or the leadership of the USCCB visits with the Curia and with Archbishop of Rome as leaders of the USCCB. In addition there are Catholic Churches in the US which are in union with the Archbishop of Rome, but are not Roman Catholic. They have there own way of managing their regional Church issues and representation to the Archbishop in Rome.
The point about conscience is not to deny anybody's right to exercise the conscience, but to point out that the one may not force his conscience on another. So far the evidence inherent in what is known about both visitations is that those in charge of the visitation are less than forthright and that there is an agenda of political control that is not befitting of ecclesial leadership. Based on the article above one can clearly see that at least part of the problem the US bishops are having is that they can not control communities of women in part because of canon law, and in part because the charisms of the religious congregations and societies require that the religious women attend to catechetical and evangelical work that does not fit neatly or at all into the power structure of hierarchy.
As any lay person knows, the vocation of the laity exceeds the hierarchical organization of the Church. By this is meant that faithful work and leadership in the world belongs to the vocation of laity. Non-clerical men, and women in religious life are laity. In almost all cases no religious community was founded to be an epicopal workforce, rather they were founded to bring Jesus / the evangelical counsels / the Gospels into the world. One expects the bishops to be helpful in this, even when they are not.
Thus far there is no corporate evidence that any religious community, or association of religious women leaders in the US has denied the teaching of the Church; talking through something is not a denial of the truth of the matter. There is a great deal of evidence that each religious community, and leadership group has faithfully submitted their constitutions to the Curia for approval, making changes mandated by them, and that the communities leaders make regular visits to the Curia. This has been going on for decades. So it does escape rational thought that either visitation will uncover anything that is not already known in the Curia. When this is done one hopes that the Archbishop of Rome has a strategy to mend the damage these visitations have done to the American Church.
Yes, let's get down to brass
Yes, let's get down to brass tacks. I'm not pretending I'm part of an institutional church in the same sense you seem to be. I look at what Jesus did in the New Testament and take my level of allegiance to the institution just as He did. I do not confuse the institution with God or need to believe it contains the sum total of God's will.
On the other hand I can easily see how the members of the institution itself need us to believe that it contains the sum total of God's will for man. That attitude supports their authority and their perceived authority is the reason the product they sell is bought. Jesus wasn't selling a product. He was teaching a way of life which demands maturing in personal responsibility and love for self, for others and for God. Obedience for the sake of institutional longevity does not get a person where Jesus taught we needed go.
It's much easier to love a mental construct of the 'church' than it is to love ourselves or each other and that's true for both sides in the debate.
Dear Mara, some of your
Dear Mara, some of your points are well-taken but I have a few problems, the biggest of which comes toward the end of your comment. While it's true that at present we "belong to an hierarchical church" I take exception to "if any congregation wants to remain relevant to this institution ... it has to work within the framework ... and from there work for authentic reform". Substitute the word "box" for "framework" and what do you have? How can a person or a congregation work "from there ... for authentic reform?" If one is a disciple of the Jesus who, in Matthew, repeatedly used these phrases: "You have heard it said.... But I say to you...." cannot just accept things as they are. They have to put their minds, hearts, mouths, bodies where he did - in the thick of messy, chaotic change. Remember this is the same Jesus who repeatedly got in trouble right from the start because he refused to "work for authentic reform" by thinking/acting inside the box. We don't live in a linear world any more. We can't just accept things as they are and move on from there. We are challenged to make "leaps of faith." Today's vowed religious women are doing just that in my opinion and that's one reason I support them.
Amen to that! I would hope
Amen to that!
I would hope that we could have an American Catholic church without the interference of Rome.
Best regards,
Bernie Olejniczak
"each individual has an
"each individual has an obligation to their own conscience."
Never mind scripture, or tradition, or the gospel, or 2,000 years of teaching. If YOU don't think it's a sin then it isn't. All you need to do is to be able to rationalize whatever you want. Hurry up God is waiting to hear from your conscience what is right and wrong, since it's you and not He making the decisions.
Dear Anonymous there's a
Dear Anonymous there's a little bit of confusion here.
For me, or anyone including yourself, to act according to conscience is to discern what God wants me/us to do in a particular situation. Of course that takes into account all the measures you list. In the last analysis, however, it's my decision (or yours). In any one situation there is just NO way to know with God's mind with absolute certainty. How can you judge or castigate anyone who professes an obligation to personal conscience? Have you never heard or read (in Scriptures) "Judge not that you may not BE judged?"
I did not JUDGE anyone. I am
I did not JUDGE anyone. I am judging a process that is wide open to abuse. God and the Church have made it clear that there are some things that are right and wrong and not open to the "individual conscience" to decide. That bothers some people because there are some things, temptations, etc. that they really really want to give into. This allows them to rationalize anything. Among these are abortion, homosexual activity, sex outside of marriage and other things that the popular culture have made acceptable. Your individual conscience does not trump the will of God, no matter how much you want it to.
Isn't it interesting that
Isn't it interesting that Rome pulls out the USCCB's teaching as authoritive, when it helps their case, i.e., when it is convenient. But otherwise Rome denies that national bishops' conferences have teaching authority, and insists that individual bishops are the only authentic teachers in their respective dioceses. Trying to have their cake and eat it too.
I hope the bishops will be proven wrong on this one.
Two things seem certain to me - forced lock step from Rome doesn't have much to do with God's truth, and fear infests the Vatican.
The average layperson can't do very much except direct their contributions to Catholic organizations outside the line and staff of the church. So oremus for the church - people of God and Pope, and while we are at it let us pray for us all too.
There were people who had a
There were people who had a rough time accepting the end of slavery.
There are people who had or still have a rough time accepting the civil rights movement in the 50s and 60s.
There are people who had or still have a rough time accepting women's suffrage and the women's equal access to education, positions, and jobs.
There are people who had or still have a rough time accepting the integration of schools, sports teams, buses, and neighborhoods.
There are people who have a rough time accepting the equitable treatment of gay people in jobs, housing, and insurance.
But the difficulties people had or still have shedding bigotry seem piddling compared to the discomfort of the hierarchy of the Catholic Church when they imagine sharing authority and decision-making with women.
Dear Mountain Dweller, Amen
Dear Mountain Dweller, Amen to all above!
Mountain Dweller; Don't
Mountain Dweller;
Don't imagine for a moment that it is only the "hierarchy" that objects to women's ordination. But that isn't really what's at issue here. The LCWR persisited in opposing Church teachings. Now it is being called on the carpet for it. If they truly believe what they claim, they should have no problem shedding their associations with Rome and getting on with their good work.
As for an "American Catholic Church"... agroup of (ex) priests already beat you to the punch. Just Google "American Catholic Church" and find out all about them. Or go to http://www.accus.us/
Someone needs to explain to
Someone needs to explain to me why different applied political judgments suggest that the chuch is not one, holy, catholic, and apostolic. The bishops, the CHA, and the LCWR seem to agree in principle: that direct, intentional abortion is not morally licit and that universal health care is desirable. They disagree on how to implement those principles, viz., supporting the health care reform act. I don't see why this is a problem, any more than voting for different candidates or taking different positions on whetherr a war is justifiable would be.
" The cardinal stated his
" The cardinal stated his belief that we cannot defend our position because it was contrary to the bishops...” Makes ya wanta cry. So, I will, maybe. On which planet is this guy living? Bishops are now infallible? Too often, having a position contrary to the bishops on issues not pertaining to faith and morals is the best defense of one's position. Or maybe such issues could be decided by the individual/group conscience, based on fact rather than merely on positions of authority.
OH wait! Does that mean when
OH wait! Does that mean when we think that a priest who has acted inappropriately should be investigated and disciplined and the bishop doesn't think so, THAT'S wrong because we believe something contrary to the bishop???????????? Give me a break!!!
This whole visitation is for one thing and one thing only, to assert power and divert attention from the priest's sexual abuse scandle.
Hey you guys have no other
Hey you guys have no other job, criticising Pope and the Church, seems like you ach one are goddess trying to rule the world.
Why in God's name is Cardinal
Why in God's name is Cardinal Levada going to consult "American cardinals in Rome" about the LCWR "assessment" (viz., investigation)? You mean that that pedophile cover-up master, Cardinal Law, is going to have a say about whether American nuns can speak up on moral issues? Or thatthe great "excommunicator" of women, Burke, will have a say? Furthermore, who is on this nameless "subcommision"? The inquisition lives on!
1. There are young women
1. There are young women entering religious life in Religious Orders associated with the LCWR, becoming novices and professed sisters. I was at an event celebrating the perpetual vows of four YOUNG women last November.
2. There is already a call to remove Cardinal Law from his Vatican post. Here is a call to remove Cardinal Levada. What does a celibate man know about how religious sisters should live out the gospel? Try living on their salaries, Levada!
Dear Bishops, You have
Dear Bishops,
You have squandered your teaching authrority and embarrassed us. You have no shame.
Signed,
The Faithful
Post new comment