What is on the minds of many U.S. women religious

One quick question:

Is the question "what constitutes Christian faith and Christian service" or is the question "what best constitutues Catholic Christian faith and Catholic Christian service"?

For me, "Christian" and "Catholic Christian" are two related but very distinct identities constituted by explicitly articulated articles of faith and doctrine.

Please do not respond to me if your intention is to do anything other than have an honest discussion without animosity, without assumptions about "what kind of Catholic" I am, without name-calling, without attacking Sisters at either end of the continuum, without attacking the Vatican, without attacking my pet dog, etc.

My question is sincere and stated in perfectly clear "dictionary" language so I seek answers that respond to the words I use "within the four corners" of this message. I pose this quite sincerely and without animosity and as a US woman discerning life as a Catholic Christian religious sister. Any ugliness - from any side of this debate - will not help me; it will only
leave my questions wholly untouched and my stomach further unsettled by the corrosive acids of ugliness clothed as righteousness.

Provide transportation costs??? Unbelievable. I'd let these visitors sit at the airport. The women religious do not receive any financial support other than what they generate on their own and the Vatican wants them to pick up the transportation expenses. Lovely.

If introspection, albeit forced introspection, brings about fear and political attack- perhaps that is more telling than anything else.

Please don't put me in the Conservative camp when considering my comments - I'm a moderate. When you lose the moderates in your griping - you may not be making your case clear.

I think the continued commentys on this topic by snowdrop and anonymous (who hide behind their anonymity show the awful division in the Church again.
The starting point of "I have the answer" gets us nowhere except into further acrimony, division and less a sign of Christ.
It's clear that the role of women, and women religious, in the church continues to eveolve and that there is still a problem with male dominated views being the controlling factor.
This problem of how women war eviewed was noted in Mr. Steinfeld's " APeople Adrift." as a major proble m in drift.
Of course, if you think you hav eall the answers....

"Is the question "what constitutes Christian faith and Christian service" or is the question "what best constitutues Catholic Christian faith and Catholic Christian service"?

For me, "Christian" and "Catholic Christian" are two related but very distinct identities constituted by explicitly articulated articles of faith and doctrine."

You are no doubt referring to the appropriation of the term "Christian" by a certain kind of evangelical protestantism. The short answer then to your question, is "what best constitutes Catholic Christian faith and Catholic Christian service" - as opposed to "evangelical" Christian faith and "evangelical" Christian service.

I think this article shows a good degree of the problem. It is rare to hear a response about this visitation relating to Jesus Christ and His Church. What most of the objectives seem to involve is "women being oppressed; evil men who want to put women down; our dignity as women; men hate us; etc" Perhaps many of these orders have began to worship womanhood over Jesus Christ? When the liturgy becomes time to worship the life giving womb of mother earth and not the paschal mystery of Christ, there is a serious problem. I have been to places where sisters have led "prayer." These "prayers" were not to the Father, through the Son, in the Spirit but were "turn to the east where mother nature causes the son to rise upon us and embrace us in her womb" new age earth worship. Does anyone think this could be a reason for the visitation?

PS...on a side note I don't think that the website people here have ever had a good sister teach them math. I know for certain that 1+0 always equals 1, but apparently not to the captch token.

To get a sense of this investigation I went to this website http://www.apostolicvisitation.org/en/about/sistermaryclare.html and listened to Mother Millea explain what she is doing here in the United States. To me she is quite sincere and her sincerity frightens me. There is no hesitation in her presentation, no hint of doubt, no sense that she is in anyway tripping on mine-fields. What must she seem like to the men who've ordered her on this mission? Why was she chosen to do this? Does she come across as a woman who will stand up to the Slovenian Cardinal who is her superior. Watch her. I've made my judgement. I hope I'm wrong. I hope American women ( and I emphasize American) are not the targets of a European, Slovenian notion of women. What must Mother Millea really feel like when she knows so many people are frightened of her?

"Reigning in" the sisters is part of an overall picture, call it a grand strategy, geared toward the perceived liberalism of the American Catholic Church. Pope Benedict consistently uses the term "relativism" when describing Europe, where traditional Catholicism has taken a back seat to secularism and liberalism. As the United States drifts toward greater liberalism, perhaps the Church is working preemptively to stop an erosion of faith ala traditionalism. This is less about power and control, male versus female. And it will involve every aspect of "Catholicity" from religious education in Catholic schools to church architecture.

cf. Carmel McEnroy, GUESTS IN THEIR OWN HOUSE: THE WOMEN OF VATICAN II. Rome didn't know what to do with religious women during the Council and still doesn't today!

FULL DISCLOSURE on every religious community's FINANCIAL contributions to the visitation (Cardinal Rode) and forthcoming investigation (Cardinal Levada).

To the women religious, I recommend that they adopt this as
their motto: "JUST SAY 'NUTS'!"

Why are women - not just those in religious orders - but many ordinary lay women in the Catholic church rightfully suspicious of the motives underlying this "investigation" by Rome? You answered it -

"... the hierarchy has continued to exclude them from all meaningful authority positions, from decision-making that has to do with their own governance, from the hierarchy that has so dramatically diminished itself and church authority by covering up the clergy sex abuse scandal for decades, the very hierarchy that continues to fight efforts to seriously amend its ways, including seeking forgiveness from the wider church community....?

"What's behind the investigation of U.S. women religious and their leadership umbrella, these women ask."

Again, it's not simply women in religious orders who ask this - but many women who are not in a religious order. You ask these rhetorical questions -

"Is it really about the good of the church?"

I would say "NO' to that question. Because the answers to the next two questions are "YES".

"Or is it about some need by the men to re-assert their authority? Or does the investigation involve a desire by insecure men to re-assert control over women ...?

And the answers to the following questions are also YES.

"... would the lives and identities of these men be changed forever? Is it all about power? Is it about self-identity? Can it be that these men fear losing their status and protected life styles? And is it that women, just by entering the inner circles, would somehow put an end to this special seemingly self-ordained male sanctum?"

It really all comes down to fear. They fear women now, just as Augustine and the desert fathers and countless other men who have run the church throughout history feared women, and, especially feared their sexual nature. If the women whom they think they can "control" are not covered by long, shapeless religious habits, and controlled by the men, who knows what might happen? We see the same fear in many of the branches of Islam also.

I was never a "feminist" - until I began seriously studying the roots of the church's teachings on birth control and, later, women's ordination. Tracing them back to the very beginning, I finally connected all the dots, and understand why the church's understanding of women, of marriage, of sexuality are so distorted. And realized the harm that has been done in countless ways because of these distortions. I was horrified to really, for the first time in my life, understand the the legacy that Augustine inflicted on us with his concept of "original sin". I came to understand so many things. I have never read even one word written by a "feminist" theologian. I have read about the work of feminist theologians (usually they are castigated by those writing about them), and enough to understand their basic premises. Anyone who takes the time to study on their own, using original documents as much as possible, will discover what the feminist theologians have apparently explained in their works. Many don't like to look into the mirror they hold up to the face of the church, however.

Those who deny the patriarchal roots of these teachings, and the legacy of this patriarchy that is alive and well in the Catholic church in the 21st century, are simply refusing to look at reality. I don't know if they ever will, or if the Catholic church ever will. Certainly these men fear these women who are no longer willing to be subjugated by them. They do God's work, they follow Jesus's commandments. They don't need these men. Women in religious orders have had to go their own way in other eras of history. It's very possible that this may happen again. And it's OK if it does. It will be for the good of THE church, if not seen as desirable by the institution in Rome. The men look to the world, to their own power. But what else can one expect of men who believe that they, the fallible human beings who are the "magesterium" and the pope, are literally God's voice on earth, while continuing to ignore what was affirmed at Vatican II - the Holy Spirit speaks through THE church - and this handful of men in Rome are not THE church.

Maybe some order could volunteer to pick up the "visitors" at the airport. Then drive them off into the middle of the Arizona desert and point to a sand dune and say "Right behind that sand dune, Reverend Fathers, is our convent. Do go ahead and make yourselves at home. I'll just go park the car ..."

I hope they film it too. It would be a hilarious.

I commend Tom Fox for this well written article. I think he hit the bull's eye on the target when he wrote: "Can it be that these men fear losing their status and protected lifestyles?" YES, They live as princes and kings. Women would expose their lifestyles and the fact that it is everything but Christ-like. Perhaps "power" is also at the root of this entire fiasco they call a "visitation of women's religious communities" but, whatever the myriad of possibilities behind their deception, it is degrading and disgraceful on every level. We are dealing with a rotten state of decay in the so called top down hierarchy of the Church. Stop giving these men your money because it only facilitates their dysfunctional and unethical behavior. If they have no money, they lose their power to do anything, including this despicable "visitation". I give my money to Catholic Charities and individual religious communities who work with the poor and disenfranchised but I stopped giving money that directly or indirectly to our bishops many years ago. They abused its' use consistently. Some bishops do indeed follow Christ's teachings and try to change the direction the Church has taken but they are in small numbers and are always marginalized by the old boys at the Vatican. The entire system is corrupt to its' core and can only last a few more decades at best. The Holy Spirit is at work tearing down its' rotted foundations in order to bring about the Church that Christ intended. The neocons and keepers of the status quo are terrified and reactionary because they fear it is going to happen sooner, rather than later. These remarkable women who taught us, nursed us and saved so many of our lives, deserve nothing less than full and complete justice and admiration from the people of God. I know they will prevail.

"Or does the investigation involve a desire by insecure men to re-assert control over women who now, having grown up, think for themselves"

What do the 'men in Rome' (you speak of them as if they are boogiemen hiding under the beds) possibly have to fear from the ever-aging sisters of America's religious orders?

Nothing.

The answer is nothing at all. (Besides the fear of having to pay for their health care) It's sad, but most American Catholic sisters have long worn out their influence and vitality, by the relentless promotion of their feminist political agenda. I don't speak for all, but I don't think that the young Catholics of tommorow have much interest in a bunch of graying feminist sisters, who themselves seem to have little interest in authentic Catholic doctrine. These Orders appear to be dying out as nature takes its course.

So the real question is why is the Vatican bothering to spend the money to study a problem which will likely take care of itself within the next decade?

With all of this angst around the question of orthodoxy the real questions facing those in consecrated life in North America are ignored. Those questions are two-fold: viability and sustainability.

They are related, and beg other questions:

Is there still a mission within the Church that can sustain religious communities as they presently exist (and will exist in coming decades)
and meet their basic temporal needs?

Are religious communities below "critical mass" in terms of numbers
of productive (i.e., non-retired) members?

What is to be done about the ever-increasing skew away from members who
are able to actively pursue the mission and towards those who require
assisted living or long-term care?

Is there an alternate model of consecrated life that can be more viable
and sustainable given 21st century realities on the North American continent?

"Rein in the women religious???" Give me a break!

They advocate for FUTURE CHURCH, ie, ordination of women, practice NEW AGE alternative "medicine" like Reikki method, ie, faith healing, have used the Roman Catholic Church as a sanctuary for centuries to deny their sexuality, whatever...

They now refuse to recite the Nicene Creed unless it is Joan Chittister's version.

Most importantly, they have been around the male hierarchy for millenia and knew about the sexual abuse of boys, girls, and other vulnerable believers. They never used their rulers to rein in the male religious.

"Battered wives syndrome?" Who battered them? Well maybe the Mother General. Please give us paying parishioners SUPPORTING THEIR LIFESTYLE a break. We are not goin' to take it anymore.

It takes a whole lot of effort and endurance for significant change to happen. These women’s emailing Tom Fox is having a profound effect. Tom Fox “gets it! ” I have been urging NCR for years to seek a new way of looking at things, but to no avail. Congratulations to these women!

“It does seem now that these questions will not go away any time soon. The women want answers. And increasingly, one way or another, they will be asking for them, even demanding them.” Tom Fox.

Of course these women are “doing everything right.” That’s a necessary condition for progress. But it is not a SUFFICIENT CONDITION. We have to have both.

Tom, you said “ -– no matter how stellar the recommendations might turn out -- they will almost certainly be overshadowed by pressing unanswered questions, products of history, education, awareness, -- begging for answers.”

I have spent a great deal of time and energy writing over the years to NCR and NCRonline. My NCRcafe series was obliterated with very little notice. THE ANSWERS ARE AVAILABLE BUT PEOPLE HAVE TO HAVE THE WILL TO SEEK THEM! THIS IS THE SUFFICIENT CONDITION. We, including the church, are in an evolutionary species change of historic proportion. The planet, earth, and we humans, Homo sapiens, are in a transformation never before seen in the history of the planet. Either we culturally and rapidly evolve or we are on our way to extinction. The concerns in your post, Tom, will seem ludicrous both to you and these women, in the very near future; so profound are the modifications in the offing! So, all of us, no matter our role or status, have to form an online forum to address and act on our concerns. This takes organization in order to be truly effective, as we know.

Mr. Fox has brought an interesting analogy to the conversation:  "the battered wives syndrome".   Actually there are many valid parallels between the syndrome and what is occurring with women religious in this country.
.

The one that stands out in bold relief is the perpetrator's claim that the victim is somehow to blame for the mistreatment.   Where have we heard that before?  ... perhaps in a previous scandal involving abusive behavior by the same group of individuals?   Then it was children;   now it is women.   There are many faces of abuse,   some is physical,  some psychological,  and some is a combination of both.   The victim is often left in a no-win situation no matter what they do.
.

There is always a third party in the scenario:  the enablers who refuse to 'see' what is plainly happening,  partly because they don't want to believe it is happening,  or perhaps fear of 'getting involved'.   Sometimes they defend the perpetrator — 'surely there MUST be some logical, sane explanation for inexcusable behavior.   Right?'   Or maybe not.   Within the Church,  'enabling' becomes paradoxically entangled with clericalism and theology.
.

In the psychology of abusive behavior there are core issues of sexuality/gender,  dominance and rage.   It tends to escalate and spread beyond its original boundaries.   It doesn't go away on its own.   Even after this latest "investigation" has come and gone,  I don't believe that we have seen the end of it...  or those who enable it.   If history is any indicator, there will be much more to come.   There is nothing holy about tactics of intimidation and domination.   Stripped of the ecclesiastical veneer,   it is what it is:   an abuse of authority.

Another excellent article Tom Fox.

I am not sure casting women religious as repeat victims to Rome is a productive strategy. It completely underestimates both women religious and the public.

I guess I am puzzled as to why LCWR does not hire a reputable advertising company and begin a sharp, modern, and long-overdue campaign to gather the public support that would make a loud no to Rome possible. One of the first tasks of a good advertising consultant would be to teach LCWR and other leaders that the public (Catholics in the pew) are indeed discerning adults who can be trusted to support issues such as this.

Of course, no doubt, there are divisions occuring within LCWR that are off the public radar and which make a more strategic and assertive response to the visitations impossible. If that is the case, perhaps it is time for LCWR to hire a different process consultant as well. Or for the communities to recall their current LCWR representatives and send new people who can quilt together an assertive strategy that is much more in keeping with the history of women religious in this country: bold, brave, creative, confident, and assertive to the hierarchy: they would never have tolerated someone casting them as "battered wives," even if it was benignly intended to gather public sympathy.

In the end, in my view, the visitations really aren't about religious life, it's all about the real estate and about the USA bishops needing to find new funds to bail out the church following the sex scandals.

"The entire body of the faithful, anointed as they are by the Holy One, cannot err in matters of belief. They manifest this special property by means of the whole peoples' supernatural discernment in matters of faith (sensus fideli) when "from the Bishops down to the last of the lay faithful" they show universal agreement in matters of faith and morals."

Jeff, you have answered your own question. If you will re-read your own quotation from Vatican II --- "when from the Bishops down to the last of the lay faithful they show universal agreement in matters of faith and morals."

If I know anything (sometimes doubtful!), it's that there are any number of issues vital to the church of today that ALL the lay faithful are in FULL agreement with with the Bishops!!! You can start with the Liturgy of which even the Bishops cannot agree with one another, you can move on to Birth Control and I think you know the answer there, and the homosexual issue? Absolutely no agreement there either! So, just what does the 'teaching authority' teach on when universal agreement does not exist? I think what is called for in the church is DIALOGUE. Any takers among our prestigious hierarchy?

Dear Tom Fox:

Please see my comment on Ken Briggs's article.

(I'm mailing you a copy of CONVENT, A Novel, today.)

Nuns' real estate to be seized by greedy bishops.

One of the Visits aims and investigative questions is to find out about the "temporal assets" the nuns have, donated funds, land, convent land.
Then the bishops can find out who has real estate and/ or funds so the bishops can declare that nun group "undoctrinal" and seize any real estate they have, any funds, sell it and continue the lavish lifestyle of the bishop.

The sex scandal has cut into the money the bishops had, and now they cast about seeking any finances and convent property any of these nuns have.
That's a big part of what is going on here , the gangsta-bishops who were complicit in the pedophile priest/bishop/archbishop scandal cover-up and continuance.

Nuns' real estate to be seized by greedy bishops.

One of the Visits aims and investigative questions is to find out about the "temporal assets" the nuns have, donated funds, land, convent land.
Then the bishops can find out who has real estate and/ or funds so the bishops can declare that nun group "undoctrinal" and seize any real estate they have, any funds, sell it and continue the lavish lifestyle of the bishop.

The sex scandal has cut into the money the bishops had, and now they cast about seeking any finances and convent property any of these nuns have.
That's a big part of what is going on here , the gangsta-bishops who were complicit in the pedophile priest/bishop/archbishop scandal cover-up and continuance.

In addition to real estate, the nuns' patrimonies may be of interest to the bishops. Canon Law and the constitutions of various congregations have different provisions, but in many cases, the nuns' inheritances are intact. Although their orders were allowed to spend the interest on whatever money the nuns owned, the principle was untouched. Who should get the money when an old nun reaches the end of her earthly sojourn?

http://books.google.com/books?id=JKgZEjvB5cEC&pg=PA835&lpg=PA835&vq=inhe...

Dear Anon - Thank you for ongoing dialogue. The thread re: "evangelical" Christianity is not my concern. My intention was only to clarify to you that I was not, in fact, speaking to or about Protestants or their faith in general or any specific form of that faith.

I am not sure how to make my question more clear.

I referenced Tom Fox's description of the orders being visited and investigated: "women who now, having grown up, think for themselves, -- just like the men -- and who are motivated by their own best sense of what constitutes Christian faith and Christian service?" (see the middle of the article above to find the quote)

I was asking him to clarify why - specifically - he chose to identify the sisters faith and service as "Christian" as opposed to "Catholic" or "Catholic Christian"?

What meaning drove that choice to speak of Roman Catholic sisters as living out "Christian" faith and service, or was it simply sloppy and vague language that caused him not to clarify that the particular form of Christianity is Roman Catholic?

Here is my understanding of the facts:

There are many Christian faiths and Churches.

The Roman Catholic Church is a Christian faith and Church.

Most Christian faiths and Churches are not Roman Catholic faiths and Churches.

If one is Catholic, one is Christian. But being Christian does not make one Catholic. (If you do not accept that, ask ten random non-Catholic Christian if being Christian makes them Catholic or if being Christian makes a Catholic a Protestant Christian).

Those are facts. I am fortunate, I believe, in my formation by Catholic priests, religious and laity: they taught me to be peaceful with all God's people while focusing on my relationship with God and without assigning myself the role of critic or evaluator or enemy or belittler of any other faith. Thus, my questions does not contain any defense of Catholic Christianity or offense against non-Catholic Christianity.

I am simply indicating my belief that the two are distinct sub-categoriess of the larger category, "Christianity" and that, in common usage, "women religious" generally refers to that subcategory within "Christianity" known as "Catholic Christianity".

When Mr Fox describes Catholic sisters as "women who now, having grown up, think for themselves, -- just like the men -- and who are motivated by their own best sense of what constitutes Christian faith and Christian service"
is he suggesting that Roman Catholics (whether clergy, religious or laity) can be defined as Roman Catholic Christians even "their own best sense of what constitutes Christian faith and Christian service" is non-Catholic form of Christianty?

Does that clarify my request for clarification from Mr Briggs?

Thanks again for the dialogue.

Peace.

I have been sitting here for about an hour reading the many responses written.
I am very taken particularly, by the comments written "anonomously". I agree with some..and disagree with others, but I wish I that you had had the courage to sign your name. I would like to say "Thank you" to those of you
who did.

I am a Sister of Mercy who has lived Religious Life coming up on sixty-five years. My first 20 yrs under The PreVatican II Church. The remainder years in
a Vatican II Church. The transitional years were difficult, but at the same
time it was a wonderful time to be alive in the Church. If you recall,
"Pope John XXIII opened the windows and let in the fresh air." I was there!!
I smelled that fresh air!! I was 35 years old.. there was new life in the Church...the Church said we should go back and study our roots... Religious
orders were told to study their founders and foundresses...COLLEGIALITY became
the new "in word"...the laity were encouraged to take their rightful place in the Church...We all became "The people of God"...our mantra "We are the Church". Those of you who were around then, do you remember who led the RENEWAL? The Religious Orders!! Even the clergy admitted that at the time.

What do I think about this investigation??? What do yo think? What concerns me most (after reading the above responses) is that this investigation of Reigious Orders and the LCWR is causing a some what division among the people
we would hope would support us.
I am now 83 yrs. old. ( yes I am one of the "gray haired complainers) however,
I still love my God and my Religious Community and I still thank God that SHE
is the only ONE I have to answer to.
"Milbo and Butterfly," do you think you could find it in your hearsts to find some "common ground"

Sister Dorothy