Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Stonehill symposium played role in women religious study
Conservative religious figures featured at the gathering in Easton. Mass.
Nov. 04, 2009
Speaking publicly for the first time about the apostolic visitation of U.S. women religious communities his congregation is conducting, Cardinal Franc Rodé said that he requested the three-year study to help the sisters and to respond to concerns for their welfare.
“This apostolic visitation hopes to encourage vocations and assure a better future for women religious,” Rodé said in a statement released by the Vatican Nov. 3.
He told Vatican Radio Nov. 4 that some media presented the visitation "as if it were an act of mistrust of American female religious congregations or as if it were a global criticism of their work. It is not," Catholic News Service reported.
In the radio interview, Rodé said the investigation was a response to concerns, including by "an important representative of the U.S. church" regarding "some irregularities or omissions in American religious life. Most of all, you could say, it involves a certain secular mentality that has spread in these religious families and, perhaps, also a certain 'feminist' spirit."
The women religious study was first announced last January in Washington, but until last week the prefect of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life had remained silent. His statement was issued, he said, in response to “many news accounts” and inquiries about the visitation.
NCR had sent the cardinal a series of questions concerning the visitation. His congregation responded to NCR Oct. 31 that Rodé had decided to issue a statement rather than answer NCR’s specific questions, one of which asked if a symposium that the cardinal had attended at Stonehill College in Easton, Mass., in September 2008 had influenced his decision to begin the apostolic investigation.
In his statement, Rodé said the apostolic visitation is a response to “concerns expressed by American Catholics — religious, laity, clergy and hierarchy — about the welfare of religious women and consecrated life in general.”
He said his office had been considering convoking an apostolic visitation when he traveled to the United States for the symposium on religious life at Stonehill College.
“The multitude and complexity” of the problems and challenges facing U.S. religious were made clear by speakers at the symposium, the cardinal explained in his statement. “This helped me understand that such an evaluation of the challenges facing individual religious and their congregations would benefit the church at large as well as the sisters and institutes involved.”
Rodé said that he hopes the visitation not only will give the Vatican an accurate and thorough picture of the life of U.S. women religious, but that it also would be “a realistic and graced opportunity for personal and community introspection as major superiors and sisters cooperate in this study.”
He said the information culled from “the standard, objective data” regarding membership, living arrangements, governance and ministries of the members of the religious orders would be made public “and should provide important information regarding the likely future trends of religious life in the United States.”
Beyond that, he said, his congregation “will formulate no conclusions or plan of action, if any, until the final report of the visitator has been evaluated.”
The Stonehill College symposium was part of the 200th anniversary celebration of the Boston archdiocese. Initially planned to draw 250 people, it eventually gathered more than 600 for daylong activities that highlighted talks on religious life, many of them sharply critical of much of women religious life in the United States today.
Rodé, who offered one of the keynote addresses, left the gathering seemingly moved by what he heard, according to at least one press account. He was quoted as saying that while “we are all in research” and while he had not yet concluded what he would report to the pope, “we all want something better for religious life.”
The Stonehill symposium was sponsored by the college and the Fall River diocese. It took place Sept. 27, 2008, less than two months before Rodé had a Nov. 17 audience with Pope Benedict XVI, at which the prefect said he received the authority to conduct the apostolic visitation.
The symposium was titled: “Apostolic Religious Life Since Vatican II … Reclaiming the Treasure: Bishops, Theologians, and Religious in Conversation.” Participants have described it as a frank, if not sometimes painful, discussion of contemporary religious life.
The following has been culled from speakers’ manuscripts and press reports, including an account on the Stonehill College Web site.
In his address, Rodé praised the “numerous contributions from consecrated men and women” through U.S. history, but added that despite these efforts the church is facing “one of her greatest crises of all time” as the number of religious vocations has declined precipitously in Western cultures.
He placed the blame at the doorstep of a misguided hermeneutics — or interpretation — of documents of the Second Vatican Council (1962-65), describing this interpretation as “a hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture” based upon “a false concept of the church and hence of the council, as if the former were from man alone and the latter a sort of constituent assembly.”
“The hermeneutics of rupture has dominated the attempts at renewal of religious life,” he said, explaining that under the mantle of renewal any change that occurred was more an “adaptation to the changed conditions of our time” rather than working toward changing the world to adapt to Gospel values.
He said changes that evolved “supposed the radical centering of man on himself, the rejection of the supernatural and operated in a climate of radical subjectivism.”
Missionary Servant of the Most Blessed Trinity Sr. Sara Butler, a member of the International Theological Commission and professor of Dogmatic Theology at St. Joseph’s Seminary (Dunwoodie), told the audience that increasingly progressive leadership of religious orders threatens the Catholic character of the orders and is polarizing those in religious life. She said this is occurring despite the fact that the vast majority of consecrated religious are not progressive or even in progressive orders.
“The problem is not only that so few are joining our ranks,” Butler said. “It is that the current polarization and division in the church at large is found among us as well. It exists in the uneasy and even fractured relationships among our apostolic institutes, within many of our institutes, and — for many — in the relationships of religious with the diocesan clergy, the bishops and the Holy See.”
Butler said that the “reality of this polarization is more than regrettable; it is a cause of scandal and continues abetted by bishops unwilling to confront progressive religious.”
Part of the problem was timing, she said. The 1960s and 1970s were the worst times to initiate religious reforms, given the turmoil and strife that marked those decades. This was especially true considering Vatican II’s emphasis on the apostolic at the expense of the monastic, she said.
Because much of the apostolic impulse was expressed through participation in social justice crusades, after religious had finished fighting for civil rights or for an end to the Vietnam War, they turned the tactics and revolutionary fervor toward perceived injustices inside the church, she said.
Another aspect of the problem, she said, was that church leaders underestimated the strength of radical feminism in the United States. This strain of feminism is no longer a part of the conversation in civil society, but it remains ascendant within religious communities, she said.
Sr. Gill Goulding, a member of the Congregation of Jesus and a professor at Regis College in Toronto, stressed that the love of Christ is “the root, ground, heart of religious life.” She encouraged religious to follow obedience out of love, not fear, and to reclaim the contemplative way in prayer and practice.
Jesuit Fr. Joseph Lienhard, professor of theology at Fordham University in Bronx, N.Y., focused on the importance of signs and symbols in religious life, such as common dress and communal living, saying that to the detriment of religious orders, these signs, including traditional habits, have been largely abandoned since the 1960s.
Dominican Sr. Elizabeth McDonough, professor of canon law and theology at Pontifical College Josephinum in Columbus, Ohio, told the gathering that Vatican II took place in a decade of assassinations, war protests, equal rights, and the feminist movement. The hierarchy greatly underestimated the impact of the times and the extent of renewal in religious communities, she said, and adopted a principle of not intervening, which meant that crucial oversight was absent.
Ann Carey, a writer and contributor to Our Sunday Visitor, said that lay Catholics expect religious men and women to reflect the teachings of the church, yet some religious today do not accept teachings on several issues.
“In the public square, families have been battling the assault against traditional Judeo-Christian values regarding sexuality, marriage and human life,” Carey said. “And now in the church we are witnessing vowed religious who not only are accepting, but are promoting that same agenda and showing no deference to church teachings on many issues like homosexuality, contraception and abortion.”
One reason for the lack of new vocations, she said, is that religious life does not seem very different from the lay life, and young people are not attracted to religious orders that do not know what they are about and where they are going.
The symposium’s final words were left to Bishop Robert Morlino of Madison, Wis., who said that Catholics must now “unlearn” the language that followed Vatican II, especially as it pertains to obedience and conscience.
Emphasizing that obedience must once again become the basis for all religious life, he blamed a widespread misunderstanding of the role of conscience — and tolerance by church authorities to allow this misunderstanding to continue — as the primary errors in Catholic life since Vatican II.
“What you’ve been talking about all day, sentiments with which I strongly agree, is the language that was learned about the church and about religious life since Vatican II. But the language that many people have learned — it is clear from today that most of you resisted learning it — and I resisted learning it; but the language that many people have learned is the language of the discontinuity hermeneutic, the language of the rupture, between pre-Vatican II and post-Vatican II.”
Morlino told his receptive audience that “the word used to concretize the love of Jesus Christ on the cross is obedience.” He said that “obedience is everything” and yet, in the years that followed the council, “obedience was reduced, it was redefined, and it was spun as autonomy, autonomy justified by following my conscience.” He traced this error to the 1968 papal encyclical, Humanae Vitae, which, he said, led to the deconstruction of the word conscience.
“It’s not that artificial contraception is at the root of every other problem — it’s that artificial contraception caused the deconstruction of the word conscience on a widespread level among Catholics.”
The Stonehill symposium, according to the college’s Web site, was funded through donations from Our Sunday Visitor and the Little Sisters of the Poor.
Tom Fox is NCR editor and can be reached at tfox@ncronline.org.




Considering who the main
Considering who the main speakers were, the witch hunt's origins become quite clear.
Rachel, Do you even know who
Rachel,
Do you even know who Sisters Sarah Butler and Elizabeth McDonough are? Judging by your response, I seriously doubt it.
Their words tell us who they
Their words tell us who they are quite clearly...have heard of Sara Butler, but can't remember in what context; McDonough is a canon lawyer.
can someone post the
can someone post the addresses of the speakers? thanks, dolores crowley
She flip-flopped on the
She flip-flopped on the subject of women's ordination - probably just in time to gain tenure.
http://www.archny.org/seminary/st-josephs-seminary-dunwoodie/administrat...
www.archny.org/media/files-seminary/Mar7dunwoodie.doc
http://www.amazon.com/Catholic-Priesthood-Women-Teaching-Church/dp/15952...
She flip-flopped on the
She flip-flopped on the subject of women's ordination - probably just in time to gain tenure.
http://www.archny.org/seminary/st-josephs-seminary-dunwoodie/administrat...
www.archny.org/media/files-seminary/Mar7dunwoodie.doc
http://www.amazon.com/Catholic-Priesthood-Women-Teaching-Church/dp/15952...
dolores crowley on Nov. 04,
dolores crowley on Nov. 04, 2009.
You stated:
"can someone post the addresses of the speakers? thanks", dolores crowley
----------------------------------------
Hi Dolores,
Sorry that this took a couple of days to do. I don't have Sr. Sara's address.
But here is Sr. Elizabeth McDonough OP, JCD, STL (yes, quite impressive degrees)address. Now, as far as I know, she is still a Bishop Griffin Professor teaching Canon Law at the Pontifical College Josephinum and her address is:
Sister Elizabeth McDonough, OP
7625 North High Street
Columbus, Ohio 43235
Sorry, I don't have an e-mail address for her. Sr. Elizabeth has served as a cononical consultant for many religious communities and for several dioceses. So her placement on the speaking roster----was certainly no accident.
Hands off Women - including
Hands off Women - including Hands off Sisters
The people who were responsible for this "investigation" (men and women) should apologise to womankind for this modern witch hunt. Yes, that's what they're determined to find - witches. W oman I n T he CH urch.
Check out :
www.apologytowomen.com and women are free to sign in solidarity.
We should all pray very seriously about this process headed by Rodé & Millea. " Everything to the contrary notwithstanding, worth though it be . . ." etc let's pray a brief fervent prayer each day that God may be glorified and honored in the lives of his faithful.
We get it already. Having a
We get it already. Having a penis makes you evil. Blah Blah
I guess the Bishops from our
I guess the Bishops from our Church during Vatican II had no idea that thewy were not doing the right thing. I think that we need to go foreward not backward as it seems some of our Church Members desire.
God Help us!!!!
It isn't an issue of forward
It isn't an issue of forward or backward. It's an issue of continuity or discontinuity. That is, will we go forward in a way that is in continuity with our traditions, or will we go forward in a way that marks a rupture with our traditions. Much talk about the reforms of Vatican II takes the latter position. The Council fathers themselves, however, were interested in a reform which was in continuity with the history of the Church.
Which perhaps suggests that
Which perhaps suggests that what people need to know about/review are the centuries of movement AWAY from the traditions of the early church whilst the church got lost in medieval problems and powers. Vatican II clearly tried to return us to our traditions, which is continuity. The desire to gravitate to the medieval period by way of the modernization up to the 19th century was a tangent of long duration, rightly brought back to tradition. You are missing the long view of history in preference to what is closer history.
Hi there, It's worth pointing
Hi there,
It's worth pointing out that none of the quotes mentioned above refer to Vatican II, but to the misinterpretations of the teachings of Vatican II that followed.
Pope Benedict referred to the same in 2005, and Pope John Paul II publicly apologised for erroneous understandings of the teachings of the council.
It is very rare for the
It is very rare for the Catholic Church to 'retract' anything.
They cannot admit they are wrong or that would mean they are not infallible to those who do not understand the difference between the Pope 'Burping' and the Formal Teaching of the Church.
Especially Those Legalistic Americans who don't understand 'Things Roman.'
When Rome wants to 'make a change' they say that something that happened in the past was an 'erroneous understanding of the teachings of ......"
In this case the 'erroneous understanding' was that The People of God were actually called to ministry.
Perish this terrible idea: "The People are at least as important as the Ordained Minister."
This Truth is not acceptable to those who want to make certain that all - especially women - and kept 'controlled.'
ghfisher on Nov. 05,
ghfisher on Nov. 05, 2009.
You stated:
"It is very rare for the Catholic Church to 'retract' anything...."
------------------------------------
Your thoughtful comment gathers together much truth. Pope John Paul was always talking about 'fulfilling Vatican II and interpreting it in the right spirit.' So, HE reframed it in his own style, and promulgated this as THE proper interpretation of Vatican II. It was a masterful stroke to be able to make that a great thrust of his papacy. Problem was, when he arrived at a belief, a truth, he didn't spend much time weighing the questions or reading any more about an issue (he didn't read much, didn't have the time). There is no doubt about it that he was a brilliant person. But he didn't consider the consequences of his positions for a moment.
You mentioned the concept that "In this case the 'erroneous understanding' was that The People of God were actually called to ministry.
Perish this terrible idea: "The People are at least as important as the Ordained Minister."
This Truth is not acceptable to those who want to make certain that all - especially women - and kept 'controlled.'"
And this was a major problem for John Paul II. Why? In Poland, the word for 'diocesan priest' is the older work for 'prince'. JP II's mentor, Cardinal Prince Adam Stefan, was a prince-prince (he was a prince by birth and as a cardinal, a prince of the church). Wojtyla himself became a prince, and as Bishop of Rome---certainly a PRINCE-PRINCE. It's was/is the remains of the medieval European caste system that is so engrained in the Vatican.
For that reason, JP II was class-conscious and an elitist. In Polish, the word 'laity' is associated with the word 'earth-world' (dirt?). In JP II's mind, the 'princes' (priests) should be involved with ministry. And the laity---should only concern themselves with earthly situations---and leave the ministry to the 'princes-priests. And priests and bishops should not really get involved with the immediate problems of the poor.
When John Paul II clamped down on liberation theology, he called in the saintly Oscar Romero on the carpet. JP II censured him and actually yelled at him stating, "Listen to the rich families. "What are you doing with all of this stuff with the poor?" (my comments here come from an eye-witness who knew JP II and was a houseguest of his).
To this day in El Salvador, there is this division---the Opus Dei archbishop and the church of the wealthy upstairs---with costly vestments and incense, and the poor are gathered in the basement around the tomb of Oscar Romero.
And yes, this medieval European mind-set is clashing with the world of the 21st century.
Vatican II also spoke about
Vatican II also spoke about collegiality and the inherent rights which came with the baptism. Those concepts have been thoroughly 'reformed' so as to insure their death and burial.
The one thing I remember vividly about Pope Paul's encyclical Humanae Vitae is that it ignored the very very majority report of the Papal commission on birth control. That commission included lay voices, and even a few women's voices. Actual lay Catholics got to present their real lived experiences about marriage, family, and sexuality. The existence of real lay people on this commission was such a mind bending hopeful sign. It's make up meant that the Vatican was actually going to listen to the faithful and just like the documents said, the laity would have a voice in developing docrine which effected them.
Our hope was misplaced. Lay involvement was to big a break with autocratic clerical tradition. Clericalism was most certainly going to an issue further down the road for both laity and lower clergy. Better to abort these notions of lay involvement before that baby got too big for the clerical bath water.
Trouble is babies keep growing and they grow into adults. That's as true for spirituality as it is biology. It's way too late for the Vatican to expect the LCWR get back in their basinette.
I find most of the "lay
I find most of the "lay ministers" more clerical towards the laity than any priest is.
the phrase "Emphasizing that
the phrase "Emphasizing that obedience must once again become the basis for all religious life" saddens me because the church has yet to address the abuses that happened to those in religious life. Obedience to superiors who cannot be trusted to lead respectfully and to protect those trusted to his/her care is stupid. Power corrupts - as we have seen, and until the check on corruption is in place, it is wrong to seek obedience from others.
Let's see now...do we obey a
Let's see now...do we obey a Council as in Vatican II or do we obey Benedict and Rode...the reformers of the reform??? I am so confused and whom to obey!!!
To obey the Council you must
To obey the Council you must actually obey the Council (you know, the ACTUAL WORDS of the Council). Benedict is actually doing this. What McBrien, Chittister, and most of the NCR crowd obey is the "spirit of vatican II," which really means that they decide what they want to do and then say that the Council "intended" that--even though it says quite the opposite.
I think people are taking
I think people are taking things out of context. If I remember correctly, (and I'm in my 40's) the 70's and early 80's were a time of experimentation and change, but they were also a time of vitality and life in the Church. In the past 30 years, beginning with John Paul II and now with Benedict XVI, there has been a retrenchment and an end to experimentation. It has been a period of "unlearning the language of Vatican II." And what are the fruits of this effort to go back? Is it a new revival? Or is it a time of fewer religious vocations, closing churches,schools and hospitals, and a graying congregation? For 30 years, the effort to erase the vision of the Council has not brought about much life or growth. As surveys show, Catholicism has not grown except by birthrate, but one of the largest groups in the US is now former Catholics. Those who think that returning to a pre Vatican II church will save us are kidding themselves. Stay awake and look! The retrenchment is not working. Let us be led by the Spirit again!
Come Holy Spirit and Renew Us!
AMEN! Jim, thanks for your
AMEN! Jim, thanks for your eloquence.
Obedience to the word of God.
Obedience to the word of God. Tthe beauty of Vatican II is that it gave back to all the meaning of OBEDIENCE not to the Bishops or othre superiors but the the Word of God as one understands it in prayer and reflection and sometimes consultation. the same goes for conscience.
Perhaps the religious right,
Perhaps the religious right, as so clearly expessed at the Stonehill College symposium, has made our Church so distasteful to Americans that we have voted with out feet.
JR
I think Morlino's problem (or
I think Morlino's problem (or his clericalist agenda) is to conflate obedience to Christ to obedience to human religious superiors.
The difference between the 2 is far and wide --- unless you are an ambitious clericalist with eyes on the prize.
Thank you, I agree. Vatican
Thank you, I agree. Vatican II acknowledged that the Church is all of us and we are to be treated as adults and not children to be controlled by the male clerical caste.
Well then, once again, the
Well then, once again, the Vatican has focused its attention in the wrong direction. If in fact the nuns today are not obeying their superiors or following church teaching as he claims, then the fault lies with the superiors of those orders and the local ordinaries who put up with it. But these are not being investigated. Instead, they pick on the whole bunch of nuns. Gee, I think they are just looking for somebody to blame for their own failure. That seems to be the rule of thumb for Vatican officials. Rode has the word "obedience" wrong anyway. He thinks it means do as you're told whether you like it or not, when it really means to show a loving deference to what someone wants and needs. On his view, being obedient means acting against your will, while on an authentic account, it means acting voluntarily in accord with your own will. You cannot force obedience. Doing so is childish and immature. If that is what he wants in religious orders, he can take his toys and go back where he came from. So far, he has been less than impressive. And the more he says, the less impressive.
Thanks for the review of the
Thanks for the review of the Stonehill symposium. I remember having a negative reaction to it at the time. Now I remember why.
"Emphasizing that obedience
"Emphasizing that obedience must once again become the basis for all religious life..."
Gee, and Jesus thought the basis was love...
...and Jesus ALWAYS did as
...and Jesus ALWAYS did as the Father told Him. Sounds like obedience was pretty high up on His list along with charity.
Are you actually equating the
Are you actually equating the words of a religious order head with those of GOD? Jesus did not "obey" the religious leaders of His day; Jesus obeyed God and chastised the religious leaders. But today we are supposed to obey these same men and women and pretend that suddenly they are God?
"...and Jesus ALWAYS did as
"...and Jesus ALWAYS did as the Father told Him."
Yes, to love :)
On the other hand, we know the result of Jesus' failure to "obey" the religious and political authorities of his day, don't we?
Tom, his obedience was,
Tom, his obedience was, indeed, pretty high on his list, but it was obedience to the Father, not the leaders of The Church. I know you and others equate the two as being the same, I and others don't always see it that way. As a matter of fact standing up to the leaders of The Church can be, at times, an imatition of Chirst himself. Peace and prayers, Tom
Abortion? What decent person
Abortion? What decent person wouldn't accept the church's teachings on abortion? I mean, do these aging hippies really hate children?
I strongly object to your
I strongly object to your comment. First of all, I am not an aging hippie (although what exactly is the problem with that?) and I do not hate children--I am a 70 year old mother and grandmother. However, I do believe in responsible parenthood; the Church, over it's 2000 year history HAS changed its position on abortion, notably starting with JP II, although there has never been an infallable statement on this. Check out some of the thinking of the early Church fathers; ergo this whole issue is not as black and white as many want it to be. The principle of the double effect still holds, there are circumstances under which abortion is morally allowable. Abortion should never be used as a form of birth control, this is absolutely unacceptable; however, there are medical situations under which it is necessary. The whole debate going on in this country over abortion says to me that the Church has failed to make it's moral case against abortion and is now resorting to pure demogagery, which is unfortunate.
Apart from all this, what does abortion have to do with the investigation of the women religious of this country?
You are completely and
You are completely and totally wrong. There is never a morally acceptable case or reason for abortion. That is what "intrinsically evil" means. There can never be any set of reasons or circumstances or situations where it is acceptable. I really hope you haven't been spreading these ideas to your family and friends, for their sake and your own.
Marion, Thank you for your
Marion,
Thank you for your comment. I know you are going to be attacted because of it. Yet, I believe that there are many in The Church who agree with you.
God's blessings to you.
At age 80 I guess one could
At age 80 I guess one could call me an aging hippie. It is interesting to me that the church's interpretation of the issue of abortion has changed over the centuries. Although it has always been held to be a sin, both Augustine and Aquinas believed that it was a much lesser sin before 'quickening'. That is, when the mother could feel movement. It wasn't until 1869 that it became a mortal sin from conception on. It is so simple to follow the change in the church's attitudes toward abortion over time now that we have Google.
In reference to Vatican II, there were many eminent theologians involved in the discussions and writings of Vatican II. I remember the church before, during and after Vatican II. Before was summed up so well in the old quip, "Pay, pray and obey". Never use the brain God gave you; never use the conscience God gave you. Never discern the difference between what the church as a whole teaches and what some Bishop has a yearning for.
"Abortion? What decent person
"Abortion? What decent person wouldn't accept the church's teachings on abortion?"
Where has abortion been even mentioned in the previous postings???
Better to stick to the topic than riding your favorite hobby horse.
There is a nun who is working
There is a nun who is working at an abortion clinic and her superiors see nothing wrong with it. In fact, she has been supporting legal abortion and lobbying for it for years (with a group of nuns). So yes, these women, who all of you are defending here, have advocated for the death of millions of innocents. The one specific nun in this situation (and I am sure there are more) has formally cooperated in murder over and over again at a clinic. And yet her superiors say this is a worthwhile ministry. And you wonder why there is a visitation? Shame on this nun for not "following her conscience" out the door of religious life so as not to lead others into sin. Shame on her superiors who put the goddess of feminism ahead of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Shame on the bishops for not stepping up years ago. Thank God most of the spineless liberal bishops are retiring soon and will be replaced by Catholics.
Chaynes, this article is not
Chaynes, this article is not about abortion. And, please try to stop insulting. It is a diservice to any argument you hope to build and an offense to the God, who you claim to worship.
It seems quite evident that
It seems quite evident that Cardinal Franc Rode is currently doing a little damage control. His comments at Stonehill College suggest that his mind was quite made up on the need for reform of the apostolic congregations in the U.S. when he spoke there back in 2008. Now his story is that what he heard there made him aware of matters of great concern. Check out the full text of his speech and that of Sr. Butler.
Full Text of Rodé s talk at Stonehill:
http://whispersintheloggia.blogspot.com/2008/09/rode-at-stonehill.html
Full text of Sr. Sara Butler’s talk:
http://whispersintheloggia.blogspot.com/2008/09/butler-at-stonehill.html
Links thanks, obviously. to the invaluable Rocco's archives.
The first I knew of Sr.
The first I knew of Sr. Butler was Robert Egan's COMMONWEAL article, "Why Not? Scripture, History & Women's Ordination" a couple of years ago. He gave a devastating critique of her opposition to women's ordination. Butler, in turn, criticized Egan's article, and Egan, in turn, again offered a devastating critique of Butler's response.
I'm sorry to say that this female theologian offers the Same Ol' Stuff that we got from Rome.
It would appear the Stonehill College conference was an opportunity for the Vatican to thank our "traditionalist" brothers and sisters for their "loyalty" to the past two popes.
And look where THAT got the church in recent times!
Obedience to roman catholic
Obedience to roman catholic hierarchy has had some strange bedfellows: silence in the face of every evil imaginable including clergy sex abuse of children, and by religious communities of men and women living closeted lives of all kinds and in cultivated ignorance.
What kind of woman actually believes that obeying the men of roman catholic hierarchy is the way of the Gospels? Whoever it is being served by that kind of subservience you can be sure it is not Our Lord. The notion of apostolic succession becomes a laughing stock when the excellencies and eminences faciliate the raping of children by their fratres in unum..
Methinks the road to hell is paved with blind obedience.
Can anyone explain how the Little Sisters of the Poor have money to be funding such nonsense?
Re: the Little Sisters of the
Re: the Little Sisters of the Poor. Good question.
Just one more item that needs some daylight so we know what the heck's going on with this religious community.
What's going on with this
What's going on with this order? Well, the answer is the leadership of the LCWR and most of you hate them because they remain faithful to Church teaching, wear habits, and follow their charism instead of trying to lead a feminist revolution.
Do you have any idea that we
Do you have any idea that we can actually disagree without hating our sisters? That we love them, pray for and with them, acknowledging a wide divergence of opinion? Sister Sheila
I don't hate the Little
I don't hate the Little Sisters, but, given their practice of begging to meet the needs of the poor elderly infirm, I am surprised (to say the least) by their apparently willingness to support this symposium.
I hope and pray that the
I hope and pray that the Church will truly be concerned with religious life and how to value the women who have dedicated their lives to God and the service of His people. Hopefully, they will provide for the care of the sick, the aged and infirm sisters who need help. Many communities are in financial straits!!
We dedicated our lives God and have tried to live out our commitments despite very trying circumstane and trials at times.Despite difficult situations with local pastors unprepared for administration and making sound business decisions. I pray this is not a one way study but truly an analytical and scholarly evaluation of the good and of issues that might need clarification and adjusting.God willing dialogue should help to resolve problems and find common ground.
I believe the only
I believe the only "obedience" that is relavent in our lives, is effecting the will of God as we understand it. If the gifts of Confirmation are real and mean anything, than focusing, praying over, and being guided by the understanding and wisdom we seek and perceive will not alienate us from Him, although we may differ from the roles others state we must follow.
The comments from Sr. Sara
The comments from Sr. Sara Butler and Ann Carey say it all. There is no dearth of vocations for women's religious orders -- only for those most loudly protesting the investigation. The women's orders who have no problem with the investigation are receiving many vocations. A number of these orders are growing rapidly -- e.g. the Sisters of St. Francis of the Marty St. George, with whom I lived from 1970 to 1987 -- and they are not unique by any means.
....interesting....i just
....interesting....i just visited a Little Sisters of the Poor...i admire
their yrs of care....i saw very few younger nuns!!!! and i contributed to
their fund, and they called for an investigation! i am slightly shocked
to hear of the two or three names of nuns attacking other nuns....glad
you named a few.....where are all the other names??? and i always ask
simple questions....things are either true or not true....Cardinal Rode,is
he the one who covered up all the scandel of the founder of the Legionairs,
and was given much money by those same Legionaires, plus a car??? I would
like someone to enlighten me....true or not...correct me if i am wrong and
i will apologise to him when i see him....true or not true, is he involved
in their investigation????? Something is very unChirstlike in this whole
thing.....and i do not hide behind, 'anonymous',...dolores crowley
"Many vocations"? That's a
"Many vocations"?
That's a relative term.
Yes it is relative. For most
Yes it is relative. For most LCWR orders ONE VOCATIONS since Nixon was president is a lot of vocations! So if a traditional order has had 20 new members in the last 5 years that is 20 more than the 2 big LCWR orders in my area have had since like '75.
Please cite your sources.
Please cite your sources.
I agree with Joseph J who
I agree with Joseph J who followed: Please cite your sources.
The Nashville Dominicans have had 20 in 5 years. Maybe Ann Arbor Dominicans-I doubt it but am not sure. If you can think of another women's congregation in the US with 20 final vows in 5 years, please list them.
"New members" means sisters in final vows. Nothing else counts.
Frankly vocations to the
Frankly vocations to the 'costumed' orders is real creepy to me.
I guess faithfulness to
I guess faithfulness to Christ and the Church is scary! It's much easier to wear a nice polyester blazer, lapel pin, and abortion clinic uniform!
No "cutie" its better to play
No "cutie" its better to play church w/ Sister Mary Burka and pretend all is well in your fractured fairy tale.
Anonymous on Nov. 04, 2009.
Anonymous on Nov. 04, 2009.
You stated:
"I guess faithfulness to Christ and the Church is scary! It's much easier to wear a nice polyester blazer, lapel pin, and abortion clinic uniform!"
------------------------------------------------
You are an extremist! All the Sisters who wear modified habits---a dress suit, some with veils, some not---are not wearing aborton clinic uniforms. And all the manner of dress that the Sisters wear----WAS APPROVED BY ROME--by Rode's office in the 1970's-1980's and 1990's. So get off of the dress already.
The yards and yards of material that go into the making of habits is NOT following poverty. Take a good look at the habits that Mother Angelica's Nuns (and they are Nuns) wear. Have you any idea how much it costs (in time and money) to make one? And they can't go into the laundry each week---because the material is too heavy. And the Nuns probably only have 3 habits to their name--1 daily habit, 1 for special occasions and 1 to clean the monastery in. So, the Nuns are wearing these habits over and over. And believe me, habits are not sent to the dry cleaners, either. They habits harbor germs, bacteria and odors, too. The head piece is made of heavily starched linin and it takes over an hour to iron one headpiece---and the Nuns wear it for two weeks before changing it. It doesn't permit air to enter the neck, ears and hair.
It doesn't matter if the Nuns take showers (if they have them in these Orders) or baths---the gals are wearing the same dirty headwear for two weeks at a crack---and the same habits---which have to be cleaned with a rag (made from the same material as the habits). Oh, yes---this is soooo much better than a dress suit that can be washed regularly!
But of course, we have some members of the Catholic Al Quida (and just as fanatic) on this website---and they believe in the Sisters wearing filthy Burquas!
Then go find another
Then go find another religion, sunshine. One that doesn't creep you out, because frankly, people like you who cling to a religion that you hate really creep me out. Maybe take up a hobby and drop all this religion stuff; might be healthier for you.
A Catholic on Nov. 06,
A Catholic on Nov. 06, 2009.
You stated:
"Then go find another religion, sunshine. One that doesn't creep you out, because frankly, people like you who cling to a religion that you hate really creep me out. Maybe take up a hobby and drop all this religion stuff; might be healthier for you."
---------------------------------
If you mean me, Sweetheart, you are badly mistaken. I just happen to know all about this lifestyle from a personal experience. Because people criticize the stupidity found in the Catholic Church (and in its many parts and pieces---like traditional religious orders), doesn't mean that they do not care about the Church.
If that was the case, we would not have had "The Decree on the Appropriate Renewal of Religious Life" (Perfectae Caritatis) coming out of Vatican Council II. This was voted upon by the Council Fathers by a vote of 2,321 to 4---on October 28, 1965.
Major religious superiors (who are like presidents and in some religious congregations are called "President" and provincial superiors, who are like governors) were mandated---mandated to begin implementing this decree at once.
They were told: "First, return to the sources of all Chrisian and to the original desires of their founders. Second, they should adjust the community to meet the conditions of today."
"Furthermore, the lifestyle of religious men and women should also be corrected so that it suits and serves the needs of their work, the local cultural customs, and social and economic realities.
The way in which these communities are governed shuld also be updated, and outmoded rules or customs should be ended at once. The renewal cannot happen without the cooperation of all members of each community. The responsibility for the renewal belongs to those who govern the communities, along with their general chapters, and each should follow its own path in deciding how renewal will occur.
Let us remember in this work that the hope of renewal lies in deep commitment to the spirit of the rule, not in the multiplication of laws."
Oh, yes---here's the norm about habits: "Religious habits should be simple and modest, fitting into both the needs of the workplace as well as the health of the members. They should be changed if they do not meet this norm."
So dear, 'A Catholic'---maybe this will 'creep' you out, but this is what
Vatican II stated about religious life and habits. And that is why so many religious communities got out of their habits (because they were unhealthy) and went into either suits or dresses (or as the needs of the ministry dictated---maybe slacks). After all, I'm sure you don't wear your best clothes giving your children/grandchildren baths, washing the car or cleaning the house.
3 cheers for Little Bear!
3 cheers for Little Bear!
Ooooh. "A Catholic" Be
Ooooh. "A Catholic" Be careful Little Bear will go tell on you! "A Catholic" with all her vitriol against the Catholic Church, one wonders why she remains in the Church, unless Little Bear's gravytrain is connect to the Church. Another thing "A Catholic" she may disinvite you from the website, especially in making oxymoronic statements. Right sunshine!
The Srs. of St. Francis of
The Srs. of St. Francis of the Martyr St. George --had two final professions this year.
Two.
That's not bad, being better than one or none. But it's not a flock of new nuns.
Don't pay any attention to the numbers of postulants, or candidates, or novices, or temporary professed. The only numbers that count are those taking final vows.
There are very few orders that are rapidly growing. They have a strong media presence, with their Blackberries and souped-up websites, but, all told, they are less than ten in number and closer to 5. Many of the habited orders are very small, with no final professions or visible members in formation at all, at least on their websites. The recent CARA study counted orders with 10 "in formation"--this is a mistake. The important number is how many take Final Profession, year by year. Many of the habited cloisters are closing-two Dominican nuns in NJ this year and many of the Discalced Carmelites.
Look around at the church
Look around at the church today and see where blind obedience has gotten us. I firmly believe that one of the unfortunate results of the sex abuse crisis will be a reluctance on the part of bright, well adjusted young men to promise obedience to a bishop who cannnot be trusted to do the right thing. Or a bishop who reluctantly does the right thing only because he is forced to by civil legal authorities. Who would want to promise obedience to such a man? On the other hand...where was the conscience of good priests who knew about abuse but did little or nothing about it? And priests are supposed to be able to look a faithful Catholic married couple in the face and tell them it's a sin to use artificial contraception? The desperation and total cluelessness on the part of the hierarchy would be laughable if it wern't so pitiful.
Exactlt!
Exactlt!
So we have Bishop Morlino
So we have Bishop Morlino again. This is the man who dismissed Ruth Kolpack as pastoral associate in the Catholic parish because she would not renounce her research done in Catholic University concerning women's rights in the church. This is the man who serves on the board of the notorious School of the Americas (SOA) which trained the military officers who have been found guilty of the murder of six Jesuit priests in El Salvador.
So this is the man who Cardinal Rode is taking advice from, this is the who asks us to obey him.
I'm sure that the results of
I'm sure that the results of the Visitation will be met with mixed results by the world's 12 remaining Catholics.
When I was studying for the
When I was studying for the Sacrament of Confirmation during the times of Vatican II, it was proposed that we would now be considered as adults in the Church, just as we were preparing to become adults in secular life.
The Church needed everyone to participate as fully as possible in the world's salvation, not just sit back as pampered sheep receiving everything needed for our care, but doing nothing to care for others. Our highest obedience is owed to God, not the Church, since the Church is but an instrument of God, not God himself...
In the nearly 50 years since, I haven't seen any reason to change that imperative!!
Post new comment