The Independent News Source
Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Women religious meet Vatican accusers in Rome
Apr. 22, 2009
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
PDF version
LCWR President Franciscan Sister J. Lora Dambroski
Printer-friendly versionSend to friendPDF versionRome
Officers of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious met April 22 with Cardinal William Levada, prefect of the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, after having been informed weeks earlier that his congregation had begun a “doctrinal assessment” of the women’s organization.
Neither the congregation nor officers of the conference released any statement after the meeting. The Vatican spokesperson, Jesuit Fr. Federico Lombardi, confirmed to NCR that the meeting took place, describing it as “very serene,” and said that the officers of the conference “now have all the elements for understanding the nature of this initiative.”
Any further comment, Lombardi said, should come from the sisters as they pass along the information to their members.
U.S. women religious were already reeling from news of a Vatican-sponsored visitation of all apostolic women’s religious orders in the United States, designed to assess their “quality of life,” when they learned that their leadership was under investigation by the Vatican.
In the absence of public statements about the motives and scope of the new inquiry, observers have raised three basic questions:
- What prompted the investigation?
- Why is it being sponsored by the Vatican, and why by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith?
- What are the possible outcomes?
Officials both in the Vatican and in the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, as well as sources in religious life, spoke to NCR about these questions on background, because the officials involved are not authorized to speak publicly.
News of the second investigation came in a February letter to the officers of the conference from Levada. Their meeting with him in Rome April 22 was part of a previously scheduled visit to various Vatican offices by leaders of both the women’s leadership conference and the Conference of Major Superiors of Men, an umbrella group for men’s orders.
While the previously announced visitation of the apostolic communities, sponsored by the Vatican’s Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, is itself unusual, the fact that the leadership conference is now the target of a separate doctrinal inquiry is virtually unprecedented.
Vatican officials told NCR that they are not aware of another case in which the congregation has conducted a doctrinal assessment of a national-level association of religious orders.
Regarding the motives for the review, one source said the concern is "entirely" about speakers the Leadership Conference of Women Religious has invited to address their annual assemblies in recent years, based upon the texts of those presentations posted on the conference’s Web site.
Though this official did not cite specific speakers or topics of concern, Levada’s letter pointed to three areas of doctrine that he said the congregation first flagged in a 2001 meeting with officers of the leadership conference: the ordination of women, the theoclogy of religious pluralism, and homosexuality. Most observers believe that a principal aim of the assessment is to ensure that future speakers at the conference’s assemblies will be screened for their positions on those issues.
Sources also told NCR that while it’s the Vatican that commissioned Bishop Leonard Blair of Toledo, Ohio, to conduct the doctrinal assessment, at least part of the push came from the Committee on Doctrine of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. Blair is a member of that committee.
In terms of process, the Vatican’s involvement has raised eyebrows for two reasons: First, because the assessment is being conducted by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, as opposed to the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, which normally has jurisdiction in matters involving religious orders; and second, because the Vatican is doing it at all, as opposed to allowing it to be handled by the American bishops. The latter is particularly striking in light of what has seemed an informal policy of the doctrinal congregation in recent years of preferring that disciplinary matters be resolved at lower levels.
For example, a negative 2007 assessment of American theologian Fr. Peter Phan was issued by the U.S. bishops’ Committee on Doctrine, rather than the Vatican.
By way of explanation, officials said that the reason for the doctrinal congregation’s involvement is because the issues touch on matters of theological orthodoxy. Moreover, the leadership conference is not itself a religious order. Nevertheless, Vatican officials said the decision was worked out in consultation with Slovenian Cardinal Franc Rodé, who heads the congregation on consecrated life, and that Rodé will be involved in whatever decisions are reached.
As to why the Vatican is sponsoring the inquiry rather than the bishops’ conference, observers point out that the Leadership Conference of Women Religious has been recognized by the Vatican as an official entity under the church’s Code of Canon Law since 1959. The Vatican thus has the capacity to issue official recommendations or mandates, whereas the bishops’ conference can present only non-binding guidance.
In 1995, the Vatican also granted recognition to another group, the Council of Major Superiors of Women Religious, which is generally seen as a more conservative alternative to the leadership conference.
“The implied threat is that Rome could leave the council as the lone official representative of women religious in the United States,” one source told NCR.
While the bulk of women’s orders in America currently belong to the leadership conference, some observers believe that an alteration in its canonical status could change that picture significantly.
As the process moves forward, observers say a key behind-the-scenes figure could be Archbishop Donald Wuerl of Washington, D.C., who was elected chair of the U.S. bishops’ doctrine committee at the November 2008 bishops’ meeting. Wuerl will take over leadership of the committee this fall, and has a reputation as a conciliator. The committee on doctrine is expected to play an important, albeit informal, role in terms of advice and support, which could position Wuerl to act as a mediator.
John L. Allen Jr. is NCR’s Senior Correspondent.
Nice title for the article.
Nice title for the article. I did not realize that the good nuns were "accused " of anything. I only read that in the seemingly parinoid writings of some of your readers.
So If the good 'Nuns' are not
So
If the good 'Nuns' are not accused of anything, why have an investigation. One assumes that based on that logic, the good 'Brothers' of religious orders will also be under investigation in due course; but of course there would be no reason at all to have an investigation into the good 'Priests' and or 'Bishops', why not? Funny that!
Cheers
David J Mapstone
Actually, they did have
Actually, they did have investigations, as did the American seminaries (and by extension, the bishops). The fact is that all orders should be periodically investigated to ensure that they remain true to the Magisterium and Tradition of the Church they profess to support.
Words are interesting and
Words are interesting and necessary things. They raise questions, transmit information, challenge us and reveal stories.
Take, for example, "visitator", "investigator", "postulator", and "advocate", etc. to use only a few we find in Church discussions and news items.
With a word like "investigator", the connnotation is that there is suspicion of wrongdoing that has already taken place. If that is the case, then to remind us of the fact that "investigation" is a part of regular "business" in the relationship that the Vatican has with religious orders of men and women, seminaries and bishops is to imply that it is a standard part of their "vision" that somebody, somewhere, must be doing something wrong. I find that a bit depressing, frankly, but possibly not surprising, given the fact that religious life and the clerical structures that now form the "dwelling place" of the ordained priesthood, were conceived and shaped in the Middle Ages, when members of religious orders and the priesthood entered those "states of life" at the age when most children around the world today are joining the Boy or Girl Scouts for the first time. (Many if not most probably would have been too young to join the Eagle Scouts today.)
Now, if anyone out there has had the experience of teaching sixth, seventh, or eighth grade students, one knows that if one ever leaves them unattended in a classroom for even a moment, there is a good chance that during that time, someone will creatively think of an "out-of-line" or even outright wrong thing to do while they are not being watched. This seems to be part of the "game" of being a child. Perhaps some rules that were designed for convents and monasteries of the Middle Ages were a "natural fit" for the age bracket of the day.
It is not difficult, then, to think of their being "investigated" from time to time, just as from time to time, teachers and principals inspect lockers and desks and mothers inspect bedrooms to make sure they are in order, clean, and free of any "illegal contraband" or signs of wrongdoing. Today that might include checking out the list websites visited.
However, it is probably accurate to say that today's men and women religious did not enter religious life as an "offering" from their family at age 10 or 12, assuming their consent. Most religious men and women today entered after completing either high school, college, or even having worked for several years before making a mature, free decision out of love for God and a desire to serve--responsibly. At that point, it would seem safe to assume that they can be trusted to do the right thing, although it would be unrealistic to assume that they will be perfect. They are, however, adults: physically, emotionally, psychologically, spiritually. At least most of them are.
Which is why to continue the practice of "investigating" religious today as though they are children, not to be trusted, is not a wise thing to do. This is why some prefer the word "visitation". It has a more cordial tone, making a welcoming attitude a bit easier. A wise visitator (i.e., "investigator" to use the term that the National Catholic Reporter and some others continue to use) will perceive the "visitation" to be a unique and regular opportunity to grow in a knowledge and understanding of one another's mission and ministry contexts (including their cultural settings), to pray and reflect together on what the experiences of the religious themselves can teach them about what God is saying in our time, to reflect further on how their shared call is unfolding in those circumstances and the needs of God's People, particularly the poor, how together they might shape a vision of response inspired by the vision and genius of Vatican II, and yes, what the areas of shortcomings, potential growth and improvement are in each of their contexts. This is mutual accountability and mutual responsibility among brothers and sisters about which we are speaking. It is part and parcel of Church life, not just religious life, if we understand what it is to be a member of any church correctly. There has to be a reason why Jesus insisted on forgiveness and reconciliation to be a daily requirement of Christians, not just Catholic religious and clergy.
We are all adults in relationship in religious life and in the Church precisely because we have freely chosen to respond to the call of the Gospel and of the Church in our time, within a unique, charismatic and apostolic vocation by God's grace. And we do this together, accountable to one another and to God, with charity and honest hearts, as all being accountable together to Jesus, and to the Church through his Vicar on earth.
So, only those newspapers eager to "sow discord among friends" and stir up the readership, and those who still think as children continue to use the term "investigate". I prefer to use now the term "collaborate" in making the journey of growth, with mutual accountability and shared responsibility for the Mission that Christ left us. Such is the context of religious life in our time. And it is in that context that the dialogue and sharing among representatives of the LCWR in the US and those in positions of ecclesial leadership in Rome is taking place. To report it as anything else is simply to think and act as a child for other children who choose to live in a child's world, or simply don't know any other world because they have never left that world, no matter how many years ago they were born. And perhaps there is a bit of projection of one's own accompanying problem with authority that provides some of the steam for that trip.
So the difference in the two approaches is the same as the differences between negative and positive, destructive and constructive, demoralizing or life-giving, slavery and freedom, fear and courage, blind or visionary, and death and Life. Each of us must choose for ourselves to which world we want to belong.
"true to the Magisterium and
"true to the Magisterium and Tradition of the Church" often equals anti-women and unjust. That is why they are focusing on these women. The church has been hostile to women for centuries. It is pathetic.
What a loaded title! Vatican
What a loaded title! Vatican accusers?
Where are the accusations to date?
Don't confuse me with this
Don't confuse me with this "Sylvester"
A well informed commentator
A well informed commentator wrote this to me recently about the pending face-off between the CDF and LCWR:
"On the whole, though, I think CDF is not wrong in what they want to correct among women religious, but I cannot imagine how they can accomplish it, because the male hierarchical falsification of Christian consciousness doesn't provide them with the sort of integrity necessary. They will certainly find breeches of orthodoxy, but the entire manner of approach will end up with two ships passing in the nite, though not with a comfortable distance that leaves neither ship the worse for wear. There will be, instead, a scraping along the hull of both ships that will be loud, ugly, and wounding."
Well, Well! you must be a man
Well, Well!
you must be a man and a priest moreover!
The Vatican "authorities"
The Vatican "authorities" must be running really scared if they feel a need to impose "visitations" like these! What is happening to the open windows of Vatican II?
Pax. Aristophilos
Hmmm...what is happening to
Hmmm...what is happening to the open windows of Vatican II?
In light of Pope Paul IV's observation/warning, "The smoke of satan is entering the Vatican." i sincerely hope the "open windows of Vatican II" are being shuttered against "satan's smoke" wisping, rising and infiltrating through all kinds of Vatican fissures and cracks.
Perhaps this will signal the beginning of some Vatican sponsored "satanic smoke control?"
Let's hope and pray it's so.
Deo Gratias.
Dear Pax. Perhaps the open
Dear Pax.
Perhaps the open windows let in the smoke of Satan.
If the nuns leadership group is proud of its accomplishment, surely a visit from the "home office" is a chance to shine, is it not?
It is not the Vatican that is
It is not the Vatican that is running scared. No because these women religious are on the brink of what St. Paul calls the great apostasy and are leading it.
Remember Adam was created first but Eve sinned first. It is not new for women to listen and follow satan first as leaders.
And besides, these women are in their seventies and their religious orders are on the road to extinction. Why should the Vatican be scared, concerned but not confident that other women will most certainly take their place. It did not take the Church long to replace Judas. The same will happen here. Sad, but with a lot of courage.
Joseph
Joseph...are you actually
Joseph...are you actually positing that women are evil? Are you married, or the father of daughters?
Surely, you must have mis-typed when you phrased "..women will most certainly take their place."
The Holy Mother weeps....
I think that you need to do a
I think that you need to do a little research. Women Religious Communities are not all in the 70's. They are far from extinction. And I'm not sure if the Vatican should be scared or not. I just wouldn't consider them "Judas". Look at all the work they have done for the Church.
Actually, Adam sinned
Actually, Adam sinned first--he lied in trying to control Eve.
God tells Adam not to eat the fruit of the tree. Adam, however, tells Eve, not to even TOUCH it, along with not eating it.
The serpent tempts Eve into touching it first--and look! Nothing happens when she touches it. Didn't Adam say something would? And if it didn't happen for a touch, why would something happen for a bite of the tasty fruit?
Read Genesis, check what I said, and then come back and reply, sexist.
I find it amazing that the
I find it amazing that the institutional Church is focusing its attention on issues such as the orthdoxy of the LCWR and the practice of Reiki when major problems cry out for attention. Among these problems are the steady decline in Church membership in Europe and North America; the continuing scandal of pedophile priests and the bishops' failure to deal appropriately with the clergy involved; the increasing shortage of priests; and the institutional church's loss of credibility with the People of God. And that is just for starters!
"Tone deaf" is the term that comes to mind. Rome is so out of touch that those of us still in the pews are at a loss when we are called upon to defend the indefensible - for example, accepting back into the Church a holocaust denying bishop and denying Communion to politicians whose public stands displease their bishops.
My daily prayer is "Come, Holy Spirit. Save your Church."
While Rome was burning, Nero
While Rome was burning, Nero was fiddling.
Two thousand years later, while the Roman Catholic Church is crumbling, Levada is "fiddling" too, picking (like a Hyena) on "women" and "third World (Read Latin American) Bishops" to keep himself "busy" till the next election of a Pope.
God save the ROMAN catholic church.
Moses
it is very easy to
it is very easy to investigate women so that they might be silenced easily but who can silence the truth they might find when investigate the men's orders or the dioceses. They are afraid of the truth!
The Vatican is afraid of not being able to handle the dirt they might find within the men's institutions. It is easier to cover one's own sins with a manufactured one of others.
they do not know that in the Gospel and in the world, the oppressed may one day rise and those who believe they might say: Shut up, Roma locuta est. causa finita! it will be just a joke to laugh at!
I am looking forward to seeing the time, the Vatican will be ashamed for all is going on and they just cover up because would shake the authority of ordination of men!
um...the very problems you
um...the very problems you point out are the FRUIT of dissent promoted by too many who collect their paychecks courtesy of the Church and in the name of the Church. In any other organization or institution, they'd be fired. The Church has been around for more than 2,000 years. There's a reason for this organizational success. Now, as for denying Communion to politicians who support abortion policy...that is not something that merely "displeases their bishops." Abortion is serious moral evil. That is a component of the Gospel of life that is a FUNDAMENTAL teaching of our Church. If you disagree that is perfectly within your right, but that stance against life has NOTHING to do the teachings of our holy Church. Again, if publicly dissenting folks are collecting a paycheck in the name of the Church or under the umbrella of the Church, all the more reason they should be INVESTIGATED by the very organization that owns the brand name the dissenters so liberally use as they please. Such investigation is a RESPONSIBILITY of the Church. The problem is...it's about 40 years late.
Building nuclear weapons is
Building nuclear weapons is also a serious moral evil and yet not one bishop has suggested that all the people who build these weapons of mass distruction and all the people who work on the systems that launch these weapons be denied communion. There is something very wrong with this picture.
Prudential judgment vs
Prudential judgment vs intrinsic evil--big difference. The problem with the above argument is in drawing a moral equivalency where none exists. Bishops Kevin Farrell of Dallas and Kevin Vann of Fort Worth explained this pretty well before the last presidential election. Issues such as "immigration reform, health care, the economy and its solvency, care and concern for the poor, and the war on terror...As Catholics we must be concerned about these issues and work to see that just solutions are brought about," they wrote. "There are many possible solutions to these issues and there can be reasonable debate among Catholics on how to best approach and solve them. These are matters of 'prudential judgment.'"
"But," the prelates emphasized, "let us be clear: Issues of prudential judgment are not morally equivalent to issues involving intrinsic evils. No matter how right a given candidate is on any of these issues, it does not outweigh a candidate's unacceptable position in favor of an intrinsic evil such as abortion or the protection of 'abortion rights.'"
Actually, the Bishops are
Actually, the Bishops are correct. There are a variety of ways of addressing issues such as posverty, the death penalty, nuclear weapons, etc. The missing ingredient here is that there are also a variety of ways for addressing the abortion issue as well. Laws that the right to life movement push do not represent Catholic teaching, but only an approximation of it. Reversing Roe v Wade is one approach to abortion, but it only moves the issue to state legislature, therefore supporting Roe v Wade is not the same thing as denying Catholic teachings on abortion. And this is why you do not deny communion to people working in the political sphere.
To - Not a Nun - So what you
To - Not a Nun - So what you are saying is in the name of organization, not about promulgating the Gospels in the name of Jesus Christ. You are more interested in the $$, paychecks, loyalty and defense of dogma and doctrine pertaining to issues that have nothing to do with the FUNDAMENTAL teachings of Jesus Christ. Yours would be a defense of and by the institution to DISSENT against the GOSPELS of JESUS CHRIST.
Take your CAFETERIA pick on issues of DISSENT: A.) DISSENT OF THE GOSPELS or B.) DISSENT OF THE PHARISAIC HIERARCHY.
You have SELECTED from the CAFETERIA the DISSENT OF THE GOSPELS AND THE TEACHINGS OF JESUS CHRIST.
Hi! I appreciate your anger
Hi! I appreciate your anger (exemplified in shouting letters). That's okay. Let me help you break this down if you don't mind. First of all, any institution has a right to check out organizations and groups which operate under its auspices and misrepresent its "teachings." A religious order, by definition, has requested canonical approval at some point in its history. It asked for this ecclesial relationship. If the order doesn't like that arrangement, it is free to drop the Catholic adjective and return to its non-canonical status; no one is forcing it to keep that relationship. Secondly, by definition, the fundamental teachings of the Church and the fundamental teachings of Jesus Christ are one in the same. I am not sure what your source of confusion is in that relationship. I don't see where the institution is dissenting against itself (ie. the Gospels of Jesus). You do, and that is your choice to see in this manner. I am personally content with ALL the "issues" so I am confused about the "cafeteria" choices to which you allude. I like the Catholic Church. If you think that the Church and the teachings of Jesus Christ are diametrically opposed, then you are clearly in the wrong Church, don't you agree? I mean it's kind of like drinking diet soda and complaining about how you don't like diet soda. Um...there are other sodas in the marketplace. Finally...I invite you to read through the LCWR web site--their mission statement etc. The irony is there is nothing remotely smacking of interest in the "Gospels of Jesus." Lot of secular humanist-feminist et. al. rhetoric, but nothing that really speaks of ...dare I say it?... the salvation of souls. Pax
From the OPENING WEB page of
From the OPENING WEB page of LCWR:
"the conference assists its members to collaboratively carry out their service of leadership to further the mission of the Gospel in today's world."
And from their Mission Statement:
"The purpose of the conference shall be to promote a developing understanding and living of religious life by:
assisting its members personally and communally to carry out more collaboratively their service of leadership in order to accomplish further the mission of Christ in today's world."
Sorry, Not-a-Nun...guess you were totally wrong on that one!!!!
Yes, I am angry Not a Nun. I
Yes, I am angry Not a Nun. I am angered about the hierarchy taking this hateful and hurtful stance against women religious in the Church whom it seems you and they are alike in your judgment against them and anyone "liberal." I think what has angered me most is your attitude and arrogant certitude about this issue. It truly seems you are judging by appearances only, which goes against the teaching of Jesus Christ.
Not just that, but these women have served the Church for many years and they deserve to be treated with respect and not thrown out after years of serving. What specific Church teaching have these nuns not fulfilled? Even pedophile priests were and continue to be attended to with much more care and mercy than is shown to women religious in general. Do you not see any irony here?
I never said anything about there not being a need for any oversight, but this is more than that. These women religious are not working to just collect a paycheck and the Church is not supposed to be just like any other organization to take disciplinary action instead of Christian action. There is no fairness or justice in judgment when the hierarchy pretends to conduct an investigation thoroughly, when it obviously has not investigated thoroughly the content of the three reasons for their investigation. The hierarchy's motives should be investigated thoroughly. Their decision is already discredited. Christian action would imply applying the virtue of mercy towards these women. But I see no mercy in this action against these women religious from the hierarchy or from your comments here. I see only judgment and condemnation and trial before any investigation has even taken place. I see not Jesus Christ's teachings from your words or from the hierarchy's. I see Pharisees overrunning the Church with fundamentalist's allegiance to fictitious dogma and homophobic and misogynistic doctrine destroying it from within and all semblance of Jesus Christ's teachings becoming subservient to the letter of the law.
In the cafeteria of choices of issues, these women religious do not present even a minimal disturbance to our faith and our Church. Yet, the Church's cafeteria choice in grabbing this issue and not the pedophile issue only makes their leadership seem less and less credible and their teaching authority practically a joke to anyone with true faith in Jesus Christ's teachings. Their actions are a secular anti-humanist and misogynistic, anti-intellectual stance and vein-glory to prop themselves up, take property away from these nuns to fill their coffers and crusade against any and all who question their "authority."
Besides this, the issue of hiding pedophile priests can not be ignored anymore. This is where the Church is dissenting against itself and dissenting against the teachings of Jesus Christ. This is the issue that needs to be addressed but continues to be ignored.
In addition, misogyny in the Church needs to be addressed. Instead, the Church continues to pick on women and treat them as being lesser persons. Jesus understands women, but the Church does not. Your calling women "feminist" does not define a woman's relationship with Jesus Christ. It is a derogatory name that men call women when women exhibit any kind of authority from Jesus Christ or any kind of secular authority as well. It comes down to your trying to discredit the existence of God in the souls of women.
If you think that you or the Church can "save souls" by lording over women and denying the Holy Spirit working in them, you are gravely mistaken sir. The Holy Spirit comes and goes where it wills and no entity can dictate to the Holy Spirit where it should go.
Don't assume arrogantly that your love for the Church is greater because you, in judging again by appearances only, think so. Did Jesus love the synagogue? Wasn't He here because of His love for us and not because we were members of a certain Church or type of people? Didn't He preach to all? Didn't He love all? Did he preach against gays? Did he say they were "intrinsically evil?" Did He say that women should not be His disciples? Did He speak to the Samaritan woman at the well? Did He ever go around picking on people and telling them they were such awful sinners and then tell them who they should vote for? Certain priests in the Catholic Church are preaching wrongs! They are diametrically opposed to the teachings of Jesus Christ when they preach such nonsense! Do they belong in the Church? Who is clearly in the wrong Church?
BTW: All indications are that that the LCWR has not asked for a divorce from the Church. The divorce is being sought by the hierarchy.
To resolve this issue in a truly Christian manner, if you or the hierarchy believe the LCWR should no longer be considered "Catholic" and divorce them from its midst, it would be wise then for the Church to allow them the roof over their heads and to not take it away from them. Throwing them out as if they were like soda with no fizz left would be a grave mistake for the men in the Church to do against these women religious. It would imply a lack of mercy and basic good Christian judgment and lack of respect towards women. The LCWR should not be financially burdened or thrown into the street, should receive severance pay, alimony if you will, and their health insurance should not be taken away until such time as they can afford.
If they are thrown out of the Catholic Church and their property taken away, etc. then you and the hierarchy only prove to be the Pharisees and misogynist that many accuse the hierarchy of being. Prove us wrong sir Not a Nun.
The real irony is when men pose as priests representing Jesus Christ and they molest children or adolescents and their superiors hide them, lie for them, move them around to continue their sexual abuse, but they appear so holy when they say Mass and pray the rosary and sing praises to the Lord and are the first to be heard and seen and writing their own laws saying they are "infallible" teachings and blindly "obeyed" with undying loyalty by the "faithful."
Am I in the wrong Church? Am I in the wrong galaxy? If the Church is ever in the wrong, and history proves it has been many times, I have done no wrong and that has nothing to do with belonging to Christ, but have a responsibility still to my Church to speak the truth as Jesus did to the Pharisees and to His disciples. But, of course, in doing so, a Pharisee would want to do just as they did to Jesus which was to run Him out of town on many occasions. Jesus would have healed many more people had He not been crucified by religious fanatics who feared His authority and His truth and desired more to believe and rely on their own laws and power. If only the Church would not enable fundamentalist Pharisees to oversee itself, we would be healed. Pax
We are in an arena of ideas
We are in an arena of ideas here. Ad hominem attacks at a casual respondent do not further your argument (nor does assuming I am "sir"--although my husband got a kick out of that :-) That is not to take anything away from you personally, mind you. I do appreciate your frustration born of genuine charity.
Let's tear this question down to the basic point of discontent: if the Church has got it so wrong...do you really think God would have allowed it to continue? Wouldn't it have failed a miserable death on its own long ago? I'm thinking of the Mass readings from last Friday (Acts 5:34-42). The Pharisee Gamaliel (one of my ancestors, no doubt) warned the Sanhedrin that if this "endeavor" of the Apostles is of "human origin, it will destroy itself. But if it comes from God, you will not be able to destroy them; you may even find yourselves fighting against God." It's that "fighting against God" issue that is so disturbing. I am not in a position to say that the Holy Spirit got it wrong the last 2,000 years.
I'm glad you brought up the priest scandal because that is exactly the kind of thinking ("let's move beyond the Church's sexual repression") and irresponsibility (Vatican ignoring criminally sinful behavior of its ministers--including religious women) that the Church needs to address. Dissent takes on many, many faces and needs to be addressed appropriately and forcefully if need be. I think it is germane to the issue of the Vatican's right to investigate dissenting elements. Ever heard of the Society of St. Pius X? All men--their bishops and elderly archbishop were excommunicated, and all those good and holy priests were thrown to the wayside to fend for themselves after years of labor and sacrifice...for what? Talk about being thrown under the bus! But I do not blame the Church. The SSPX chose its own demise through its own core beliefs: virtually NOTHING of Vatican II is valid. Sorry. That cannot exist within any organization--a house divided cannot stand--that's Biblical, not judgmental. No such thing has happened to the women in question in this article. No one is even suggesting that. The problem is everything that the National Catholic Reporter is NOT reporting in this article that is the crux of the issue. So, when the keynote speaker at a major LCWR-sponsored event preaches a "dynamic option" for women religious communities that "involves moving beyond the Church, even beyond Jesus..." yeah, I think it's time the Church officials get involved when the LCWR was asked 8 long years ago to please mind what it preaches in the name of the Church.
http://www.lcwr.org/lcwrannualassembly/2007assembly/Keynote.pdf
Your anger and bitterness in this issue are understandable given the parameters set for your vision of Church (and men in general?) But both views cannot simultaneously exist in the same organization. That we can agree upon, I'm sure.
your SISTER in Christ ;-)
Don't you see that it is
Don't you see that it is departure from the fullness of the Faith that leads to lower church attendance? Lower numbers of vocations? When the faith is compromised, that the MysticalBody suffers? And that dissenting sisters are a major source of scandal which undermine the credibility of the Church? (Of course, there are many others who have brought scandal to the Church--namely bishops, priests, laypeople--everyone). But to let the festering sore of sisters who claim to have grown beyond Jesus simply continue is not pastorally responsible. My own faith as a child (I'm in my 30s) was nearly destroyed by sisters who taught me things which were untrue, who were more angry at the Church than in love with Jesus, etc. Is renewal necessary? Most likely. It always is. But it can't be done by denigrating the Church and taking a revolutionary tone.
Thank you, Anonymous! Well
Thank you, Anonymous! Well said!
The Vatican is fixing the
The Vatican is fixing the causes which led to your "major problems [that] cry out for attention". Return to orthodoxy, then the "major problems" will go away. The truth will set you free. Orthodoxy will set us free from these major problems in the long run.
It is not Rome which is out
It is not Rome which is out of touch. It is those who constantly harp on the failures of an extremely small number of clergy and the insistance of those who have not been catechised properly that the church must "modernize". What do you think Jesus would do with a "holocaust denying bishop". Perhaps try to get him to rethink his position? Maybe, God forbid, forgive him? FYI, politicians whose public stance displeases their bishops, may also be displeasing the word of God as well? Wow! I wish those of you who disagree so vehemntly with the current status of the Catholic Church would find another one which suits you better and leave us alone. There are many of them out there. Go.
My Dear Maryjean, You must be
My Dear Maryjean,
You must be a "wolfsister" in sheeps clothing. . .this writer is 'Joe Sixpack' in the pew, the fella among millions of like souls who pay the bills for the 'people of God' in North America and beyond. It is criminal that this action by the Holy See has taken 30 years to come to fruition. . .these Jezebellian covens of witchcraft should have been contained years ago before their poisionous venom had an opportunity to destroy large amounts of tissue in the Body of Christ. God is awesome and in control. Fortunately, for the 'people of God' in North America there are NEW and YOUNG religious orders springing up from the ashes of the old. Vocations are growing by leaps and bounds! VIVA GESU! Guess what, Maryjean. . .good news also on the priestly front. . .the young fellas on the altar are reversing all of the progressive crap that has become entrenched since VatII. . .they're going back to preaching the GOSPEL and teaching the TRUE doctrines of the Church and they're using that pesky "Catechism of the Catholic Church" to do it. . .they're taking scandalous politicians to task from the pulpit! If you believe that bishops shouldn't deny Holy Communion to apostate politicians then you are the one who should find a NEW PEW, perhaps among the Methodists who seem to believe that the 10 commandments are a 'living document'. . .as for the millions of 'Joe sixpack pewsitters' yeah, we're still in the pews and we've got lots of children in tow, many of them 'homeschooled' who will be the religious of tomorrow. . .The best news of all for you Maryjean is that your daily prayer is being answered!!!! "Come, Holy Spirit. Save your Church!" He's doin it before your very eyes. . .open them up and SEE!!
P.S. This "Joe Sixpack" stoped giving money to CHD and Jezebellian religous houses. . .so have millions of other 'Joes". . .see a dip in the old funds, eh? Read Christ's letter to the Church at Laodicea- - -it's good stuff!
My dear "joe Sixpack" Let me
My dear "joe Sixpack"
Let me suggest that you take the money that you "stopped" giving and put it in to some good therapy sessions. It might help with your anger and convoluted ideas of the Gospel.
I don't know if you realize
I don't know if you realize it or not, but, Reiki, etc. is breaking down the spiritual aspect of the church, by turning Eastern and occult practices instead of Jesus, for healing. That is as important as the other factors you mentioned, in the breakdown of our churches.
Tone Deaf is a very loaded
Tone Deaf is a very loaded label. In the good ole days of Vatican II's "hidden secret reformation" these women and not so few priest (pedophile liberal priests included from the 1970's) could function and move without oversight or accountability. This was the REAL "Tone Deaf" leadership. The Vatican was a far away land.
What is refreshing for me is how small our organizational Church of Christ has become, so that our beloved Pope Benedict XVI can use his Ministry so effectively worldwide to teach the Truth of Jesus Christ in which he is called to preach.
For those members who wish to remain in the shadows weaving their wicked web of deceit against the church faithful quietly...those days are over.
Take a Stand for the Truth of Christ.
Orthodoxy, Heresy and
Orthodoxy, Heresy and Apostasy are at the root of this problem. The Church must concern itself first and foremost with proclaiming TRUTH. Worrying about popularity is of little consequence. However, attendance, adherence, and vocations are inversely proportional heterodox teaching. Liars, heretics and apostates (and their teachings) must be rooted out so that future generations will not be infected with their cancer as past and present generations have been. By the way, the previous title of the Office of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith was the Office of the Holy Inquisition. And this IS an Inquisition. Go Grand Inquisitor!!
FEAR is pervasive in the
FEAR is pervasive in the Vatican corridors!!! What else would prompt the Vatican "authorities" to impose such "investigations" upon dedicated and prophetic women???
Pax. Aristophilos
How about because these nuns
How about because these nuns can't even find the reservation much less stay on it. This is long overdue for a group that consistently dissents from Catholic doctrine.
Having speakers at a
Having speakers at a conference with whom the vatican has some disagreement is not dissent.
Annie O - The voice of reason
Annie O -
The voice of reason in one simple sentence! Thank you so much.
J.H., Thanks. Not often that
J.H., Thanks. Not often that it so clear and easy to say, is it? :-)
Mike Malone, Jesus didn't
Mike Malone,
Jesus didn't establish, contemplate or encourage anything that wasn't the exact opposite of a "reservation."
Those who go around accusing God's children as being "off the reservation" are either demonic or silly. It is absolutely the most anti-Catholic phrase one can muster.
The article title might just
The article title might just be a little overly dramatic.
Could it be that the three
Could it be that the three thousand pound pink elephant in the corner is the ordination of women? Pluralism and homosexuality might well be cover issues. The Episcopalian experiment with women in Holy Orders has been a success. Even the Greeks have ordained women deacons...
Oh yea the Episcopal
Oh yea the Episcopal experiment is going great. Their communion is fracturing by the day over just those pet issues of the LCWR...women's "ordination", gay marriage, unorthodox belief and practice.
Women make outstanding
Women make outstanding ministers and preachers and as a male member of a church that ordains them I speak from experience. Sir or madam, while I value good ecumenical and fraternal relations with your church, it becomes more than obvious that the constant bashing of my church (TEC) on these pages by the ultamontane crowd has more to do with American politics (hard right) than any old 16th century doctrinal diputes which once led us to burn one another.
This is confirmed by the complete absence of ANY critical comment against blatant anti-Catholic sermons and publications by several evangelical Protestant churches and groups. Ah, but their politics also tend to be hard right so the Catholic far right bites its tongue. Politics indeed makes strange bedfellows.
Nicely stated. I too wonder
Nicely stated. I too wonder why the ultra right says not one word about the poaching being done by Evangelical Christians and Mormons of the Catholic faithful. The truth is these two groups have done far more to reduce the Catholic body than the nuns of LCWR.
Brazillian bishops estimate that Evangelicals are costing the South American church 300,000 adherents per year, and yet not one peep from the righteous right in America.
Members of these pentecostal groups even camped out on Mount Everest to wage a Spiritual Battle against the demonic presence who holds the Catholic Church hostage. And who might that demon be? The Queen of Heaven. Seems to me this kind of thing is just a bit beyond Wicca and whole lot more anti Catholic.
Sorry the TEC seems to be the favorite punching bag here, because as you point out, there are far more hostile entities out there.
I don't think the response
I don't think the response had anything to do with politics. It was responding to a claim that the "episcopal experiment of ordaining women" was a great success. The respondent simply pointed out that the Anglican Communion is in schism because of that very issue, so the "experiment" might not be a successful as he or she thinks it is.
An organization of all
An organization of all celibate males (Vatican, Curia and National Conference of Catholic Bishops) appear to be judging the orthodoxy of all female religious orders...!!! Sound familiar???
All right - before anything
All right - before anything else, must this article be titled quite so pejoratively?
cant say im surprised that
cant say im surprised that they are investigating.
http://catholickey.blogspot.com/2009/04/why-lcwr-is-being-investigated.html
a modern inquisition ???
a modern inquisition ???
You took the words right out
You took the words right out of my mouth!
So the only thing worthwhile
So the only thing worthwhile in the bishops' eyes is doctrinal purity...what exactly has doctrinal purity ever done to accomplish anything relating to the great commandment, you know, the one about loving your neighbor? And what about taking the plank out of their own eyes before pointing out a splinter in a group who is all about education, justice, living amongst the poor, and constant prayer??
Frankly, the bishops just don't hold up in a comparison with the nuns.
"And what about taking the
"And what about taking the plank out of their own eyes before pointing out a splinter in a group who is all about education, justice, living amongst the poor, and constant prayer??"
They can't even admit they HAVE a plank in their eyes, much less take it out. These guys are beyond rational anymore. They know one word, and one word only: POWER. How to get it, how to keep it, how to enlarge it.
Eventually they will hold power over only themselves. And whine about it.
"Frankly, the bishops just
"Frankly, the bishops just don't hold up in a comparison with the nuns." You've hit the nail right on the head! This is precisely the reason they will never allow women clergy in the Roman Catholic Church. These guys are just too arrogant and narcissistic to ever stand up to evangelical competition from women. Even St. Paul had to admit that women deacons worked as hard as he did in spreading the gospel.
Sorry, Church had to finally
Sorry, Church had to finally realize there were no ordained women deacons in St. Paul's day. Need to update your knowledge.
When did the Church "finally
When did the Church "finally realize there were no ordained women deacon in St. Paul's Day."? That is woefully incorrect...it is undeniable that there were those ordained women deacons.
Just a follow-up to that
Just a follow-up to that comment...
Romans 16:7 includes the name of a woman given the title of "apostle." Of course, I've never read any RC translations, so perhaps they are different.
READ THIS.
READ THIS.
No matter how this whole
No matter how this whole process is couched, in what terms, I get a feeling of "witch hunt". It is another example of a fear-ridden hierarchy. We are in danger of becoming the type of church where "They (the powers that be in Rome) have all the answers, but we can't ask any questions"
I recently read an article by John Shelby Spong in which he laments the demise of the Catholic church. Basically his remarks were very critical of this kind of high-handed action by vatican officials as the cause of this demise.
I truly believe that the Church will survive, but not in the way that it is currently constituted. My regret is that I am too old to see the outcome.T394Z
So who is investigating the
So who is investigating the "orthodoxy" of the Vatican?
In my 33 years of vowed
In my 33 years of vowed religious life, I have spent many long nights awake and listening to the sounds of sad despair and fear in so many corners of our world.There were the refugees camps, the inner city streets and humid ghettos and favelas. I have witnessed the confusion,pain and loss of innocent life due to civil war and violence. More often than not, the root of the struggles were wrapped in questions of power. Only after much shedding of blood and destruction on so many levels are the survivors FINALLY called into a 'peacemaking dialogue' of sorts. This moment begs the question: Why not start with the peacemaking dialogue FIRST and avoid the confusion, pain, and loss of innocent life? Why not encourage HOPE-FULL reflection as we continue on our journey in the heart of Divine Mystery? Will the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith be interested in that?
An investigation aboaut
An investigation aboaut doctrinal matters related to the lCWR will not lead to loss of innocent life. What a butch of nonsense to even write that.
Because, Sister Maureen, this
Because, Sister Maureen, this investigation of LCWR as well as the Apostolic Visitation isn't about all those things of which you have spoken. This is about the choice you and other Sisters made so many years ago about your lives, not the lives of those you have served. This is about your vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience (the last of which is perhaps the all-encompassing and most important vow) that have been reduced to friendship, economy, and dialogue.
The choice so many of these
The choice so many of these sisters have made is to follow the Holy Spirit into the heart of the gospel. Yes the gospel is what the Vatican and the rest of our bishops seemed to have lost given up on for the sake of an institution. IF the institution stops serving the purpose for which it is found then what good is it. It is like salt that has lost its flavor. When I read the gospel I get the feeling Jesus is talking about the pope and his bishops whenever he is railing against the religious authorities of his time. Every time I see a hero in our church they quickly become targets. While women's ordination seems to be a no brainer I sometimes wonder if it is not a good thing women are not ordained as the sisters seem to be the ones keeping the gospel alive. Might they get sucked into power and whatever else seems to creep into our church that causes it to stray. God have mercy on us all.
To my friend TNCath, I am
To my friend TNCath, I am curious to understand how you could possibly know that my vows of poverty, chastity and obedience have been reduced to friendship, economy and dialogue. Have we met? Do you know me or my mission or my commitment? Or perhaps its simply a wide, general judgement? Perhaps the investigation, in fact, is not necessary. An opinion has already been formed.
Sister Maureen, I returned to
Sister Maureen, I returned to this place after considering a response overnight, but I see that you have given my response to TNCath for yourself. I wonder the same things, even though not a vowed religious of 33 years time. Yes, indeed, HOW could TNCath even presume to understand the meanings of these vows, let alone proclaim their "reduction" to self-serving words of his/her own?
I have become strangely fascinated by the hostility shown to wonderful women who have devoted their lives in service to God's people and the church, only to have angry slams directed toward them over every comment they make about their lives. Perhaps it is because of a belief that women in the church, especially those who have given their lives to the service, should be "seen and not heard." I consider this a sickness in the Church.
Please take my comments with
Please take my comments with all sincerity and charity. I do not write in a mean-spirited way and I hope I am not taken that way.
Sister, I think where TNCath was coming from was very simple--he/she read your post as leaving much to be desired regarding the supernatural life. Your original post said:
"In my 33 years of vowed religious life, I have spent many long nights awake and listening to the sounds of sad despair and fear in so many corners of our world.There were the refugees camps, the inner city streets and humid ghettos and favelas. I have witnessed the confusion,pain and loss of innocent life due to civil war and violence. More often than not, the root of the struggles were wrapped in questions of power. Only after much shedding of blood and destruction on so many levels are the survivors FINALLY called into a 'peacemaking dialogue' of sorts. This moment begs the question: Why not start with the peacemaking dialogue FIRST and avoid the confusion, pain, and loss of innocent life? Why not encourage HOPE-FULL reflection as we continue on our journey in the heart of Divine Mystery? Will the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith be interested in that?"
You do not mention Jesus Christ once in your response.
For a vowed nun, that is troubling.
Furthermore, your post seems to lean dangerously in the direction of the self-styled "social gospel" as opposed to that of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Now, on the other hand, it is only fair to give you the benefit of the doubt as you were writing in a simple fashion and were not preparing a treatise.
As I am sure you know, the problems of the world that you mention will not go away if we solve poverty and wars. We will always have to deal with the reality of sin. Jesus Himself stated, "The poor you will always have with you." Now let me also say that Jesus' words do not mean we forget the poor. No, rather, we see Jesus in them and serve them.
The difference between orthodox and heterodox theology on the theology of the poor is rather quite simple and can be summed up in a rather simple fashion--We do not mistake the forest for the trees.
Christians, in serving the poor and helping war-torn countries, do not get so wrapped up in their work that they lose their gaze upon eternity. It is precisely because their hearts and minds are fixed upon the "Divine Mystery" (as you say)--the transcendent Triune God and how He saves us--that Christians serve the poor. It's about serving God, not the poor. That is charity. It is supernatural and can not be obfuscated with the natural.
Furthermore, "righting the [social] wrongs of the world" is not what is going to bring about peace. To argue otherwise is to go the way of the satanist Karl Marx, plain and simple. There is no getting around it.
Jesus Christ is the answer and He alone.
I would posit, Sister, that TNCath read your post as being devoid of anything truly supernatural, hence his/her characterization. Sometimes, it is not what we say but how we say it that betrays what is truly in our hearts.
What was in your heart as you wrote your original post is known to you and God alone and so I will make no personal judgment and leave the matter to your conscience.
In all peace and charity,
-Kevin J. Symonds
Alabama
Post new comment