Arizona nuns blast Vatican, Catholic teaching [CC]

[JReducation]

Originally Posted by theinquisitive
A totally dispicable “document”, unworthy of any Christain to compose…
Unforgivable to be asked to sign…
JReducation,
please re-read the above.
I do not imply that anyone was “made” to sign!

“I did this very joyfully and so do my religious brothers and sisters. No one makes us sign it. We want to do so, because as Kimmie said that the good sister taught her, we chose this way of life. In my case, we I had ten years of formation to think about this great step. There is nothing beneath us in this. Our own founder, St. Francis, used these same words to refer to himself and to his sons. We are nothing. We have no worth. We are Minors.”

My comment is that it is un-Christian to leave the “Good Sisters”,who ever they may be,without the very basic necessities,after a life spent in the service of Christ.
It is not given to everyone to realise the extent of their commitment at the time of “signature”,very many are extremely young,in good health,old age seems very far off.
It is quite unreasonable to expect every one to acknowledge (fully)that fact.
I recognise your commitment and it seems to be (at the moment) that you are happy in your vocation. (is being happy alowed ) I wish you well,which does not mean that I agree. = “We are nothing. We have no worth”.

The goal is to happy, even when you have nothing. To find happiness in the knowledge that God is creators, redeemer and savior is the goal of religious life. Whether you are young or old, as I am, nothing changes as long as you keep this covenant in mind.

I believe that is where many sisters are having troubles. The original covenant is no longer present. There are still communities of men and women religious who suffer hunger, lack of healthcare, lack of shelter in our old age, who have to beg to pay bills or go to a doctor or even eat. But it’s done with great joy and a strong sense of redemptive love. Then there are those who suddenly feel that they have been cheated because they did not get something that was never part of the plan or even parf of religious life. From where I sit, reading some of these newspaper articles, it looks like some, not all, of these religious women suddenly want to be treated as diocesan priests. Be we religious are not diocesan priests. We are not even members of a dicocese, any diocese in the Church. From the moment that we make perpetual vows, we are canonically excardinated even from the diocese of our baptism. Basically, we become nomads in the Church. That is the sacrifice and beauty of the vow of poverty. You not only conform to the poverty of Christ, but you also conform to the indignity of Christ. As St. Francis always said, you embrace the idignity of Christ to experience in your own body the suffering that he experienced on the cross and to love in return as he loved you from the cross. The only payback is heaven. A person who had this very clear in her mind was Mother Teresa and her sisters. There is no payback from the Church or from any other source. We depend on Divine Providence. As everone knows, God has plenty of money.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Corki]

Corki,
I apologise for not stating my comment correctly (english is not my “mother tounge”)
I ment in my opinion,he should be stripped of his/her retirement benefits…
That this be possible is not the point I was stressing. (only wishfull thinking)
BTW. there are also the Company Pensions, which of course can be with held in cases of criminal acts (among others) which harm the company…

I don’t know where you live but that would be illegal in the US. Pensions are strictly governed by ERISA. Future contributions can be blocked, the benefit can be deflected (for example to family members, by court order) but the earned benefit cannot be withheld.

 

[Corki]

Are you saying that it is quite ligitimate to leave those poor Sisters,Brethren to a life of semi starvation?

While at the same time denying the basic needs of the “Good Sisters”?

Who are these sisters who are living in semi-starvation? Who is denying them basic needs?

I know many sisters and nuns. Some orders and congregations are in dire circumstances. But their worries are for the future, some congregations are dying off. I know many sisters who have chosen a life of poverty and simplicity but even those are not living in hunger or without a roof over their heads.

And in a (probably futile) attempt to get this thread back on topic, are any of the sisters who are complaining about the Vatican visitations living without basic needs?

 

[JReducation]

I ask you,in all honesty, is it in the interest of the Catholic Church,to be seen to be financing the comfortable retirement,of countless priests who,have not only shamed themselves,but also the C.Church,to whom they also owe obedience,bound by the “contract” which they signed,including the pledge to live the life of celibacy? (needless to say they also caused unforgivable pain to so many)
While at the same time denying the basic needs of the “Good Sisters”?

Inquisitive, we have to understand here that there are two very different states or vocations. A diocesan priest is not a religious. He does not make vows. He does not sign such a contract or enters into any kind of covenant relationship with the Church or a community. He is a secular man. When a diocesan is ordained a deacon he makes PROMISES. These do not have the same meaning or power as VOWS. He makes only two promises. He promises to obey his bishop, no one else. His obedience to his bishop is limited to ministry, not his personal life or spiritual development. Neither the bishop nor the pope can interfere in the private spiritual life of a diocesan priest. His promise of obedience only covers his assignments and duties in the Church, not how he lives his spiritual life.

At the same ordination, if the candidate to the diaconate is not married, he makes a second promise, to remain celibate. This means that he promises not to marry. It does not mean that he consecrates his life to follow a religious founder, a rule, to live within a community of brothers or sisters (for women), or to consecrate his life to the perfection of charity. This is the vow of chastity. Diocesan priests do not make a vow of chastity. Religious men and religious women do make a vow of chastity.

Diocesans never make a vow or promise of poverty. Only religious consecrate our lives by a vow of poverty. We depend totally on Divine Providence, not on the Church to support us. It is a legal requirement that goes back to the Dessert Fathers and Mothers who were the first consecrated religious in the Church. The men and women in the Acts of the Apostles were not consecrated religious. They were secular men and women. That’s why the local Church took care of them. The Dessert Fathers and Mothers were not part of the local Church. They left the local Church to live a life of solitude, prayer, penance, poverty, obedience, chastity and autonomy from the local diocese. the local bishop had no jurisdiction over them or duty toward them. This has been this way since the year 200.

Later, Vincent de Paul, founded the first apostolic congregation in the Church, the Daughters of Charity. He borrowed the vows of the monastic life, but combined it with the apostolic activity of the laity. From there, many religious congregations of men and women were founded. By keeping the vows of monastic life, which come down to us from the Dessert Fathers and Mothers, the autonous status is preserved. While religious in apostolic communities do not receive funds from the dicoese, they have no obligation to the diocese either, except if they work for the diocese. In that case, they only answer to the diocese in matters respecting their work, not their life.

A diocesan priest or deacon who works for a diocese is a horse of a different color. He is a secular man. He is paid a salary and has fringe benefits. In the USA, every diocesan deacon and priest pays: taxes, social security benefits, 401K, retirement plans, his share of health insurance, auto insurance, home owners insurance and what ever other insurance and benefits any lay person is legally entitled to. Under federal law, the diocese cannot take that away from him when he separates from the diocese. It does not matter what the reason for separation is. The reason is that this is his money, not the money of the Church.

Religious men and women do not pay any of these plans. Because we do not pay for any of them, we do not have to right to claim them either from the state or the Church. Some religious communities have invested in retirement funds for their older people. That’s up to the religious superior. I can tell you that in my community, we are not allowed to do this. Francis did not allow us to have any kind of financial security for our old age, sickness, homelessness or other catastrophic condition. I know that the Missionaries of Charity do not have any of this either. Mother Teresa borrowed from St. Francis the same ideal of absolute poverty.

All of this being said, there are times when things are rough and we have to beg for things. But to demand that a diocese susidize us is immoral. I’ll explain why. It is unjust to demand that someone subsidize you when they have no moral duty to do so. It is another to ask for help. There is nothing wrong with humbly asking for assistance. I don’t believe that the few sisters whom you may read in these reports represent the majority.

Also, notice that you mentioned “the poor sisters”. Women religious are not the only ones who make this covenant, make vows, or live in poverty. What happened to male religious? How come they are not in the paper demanding anything from the Church? That should be a signal to some people, that these women are not representative of religious.

In closing I can tell you from personal experience, I have cancer. I go to the hospital like every poor person, through the emergency room. When I run out of medication, I don’t take any unless my brothers can get soemoen to donate them. We have no medical insurance and no disability insurance. This was the way that I promised to live and die. This fills us with great joy, knowing that God has never abandoned us. He is very good.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[theinquisitive]

By JReducation,

“In closing I can tell you from personal experience, I have cancer. I go to the hospital like every poor person, through the emergency room. When I run out of medication, I don’t take any unless my brothers can get soemoen to donate them. We have no medical insurance and no disability insurance. This was the way that I promised to live and die. This fills us with great joy, knowing that God has never abandoned us. He is very good”<<

Yes God is mercyfull,good,He does not abandon us,but what about his “followers”?
My Daughter died of cancer in Summer of this year,so you can imagine how I feel learning of your illness,I pray for you …
I’m afraid it does not concern me how many “different” types of “Religeous” there are,
the comandment given by God through Jesus Christ:- “Love thy neighbor as thy self,and above all love God” still holds does it not?
The Brothers and Sister having to “beg” for assistance in illness and in old age is not following that commandment.
In ending I once more wish you well,and will pray for you.

 

[LutheranDK]

There is something that you may be missing here.

A secular priest (not a regular priest), a secular priest pays taxes and pays for his retirement plan out of his salary. Legally, in those countries where they have to pay taxes and retirement, they are entitled to those benefits, because they are paid for our of their pocket. This is not a charity from the Church. If the Church asks them to invest in their retirement plan, then they have a legal right to draw from it. That right has nothing to do with their other legal issues.

Religious (men and women), we do not receive a salary for our services. Therefore, we do not pay taxes or retirement benefits, either through the civil state or through the Church. Some religious communities have retirement insurance plans that they purchase from a private provider. The religious community pays for the premiums, not the individuals. Therefore, we religoius do not have a right to those benefits, if we leave the religoius community. The policy is purchased in the name of the community, not the individuals. The money used to pay for it is community money, not individual money. We have no individual monies.

Hope this helps.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Do you really think she cares about the explanation?
As long as she can shout at the “hypocrite religions”, etc, then she doesn’t care about the facts…

 

[soflochristmas]

By “normal” employees, are you talking about people like you and I working in the secular world? I hate to break it to you, but a “sacked” employee is never stripped of his/her retirement benefits. Not the ones he/she has contributed to or any other ones he/she has earned through length of service. That’s the law. Even if a “normal” person is convicted of a crime (which most of these priests were not) and is sitting in jail, he/she is still legally collecting pension or defined contribution benefits.

You’re wrong. He is if he is a union member who leaves the union.

 

[Corki]

You’re wrong. He is if he is a union member who leaves the union.

As I said, I was speaking of “normal employees.” Regular employees, with regular benefits covered under federal retirement laws cannot lose pension benefits due to being fired. Union pensions and pensions that are not qualified plans are completely different animals.

But please tell me what priests, nuns or religious are part of a union?

 

[theinquisitive]

JReducation,
thankyou for the information,I did know most of what you (so rightly) state.
My comment was not based on a “legal” point,but simply on the basis of Charity,Love,Hope and “Righteousness”,without which, Faith is nothing.
The very intricate details,of the many aspects of Religious vs.Priests, is of course legaly determined.That is not the point I was stressing.
Furthermore I am of course “interested” in what you have to say,for if not I would not read your comments.
Because I do not agree with the way things are handled,does not make me any less a Christian than the next.
As you say “God(=Church) has lots of money” ,which is true, IMO.they should use some of that to help those,who have worked, their life long, in Gods cause (=C.Church) for NO money,at least in old age and in bad health. Which BTW.would be very little compaired to the wealth squanderd on Law suits,and other things ie. un-necessary “luxus” enjoyed by very many in the C.Church hierachy.
I visit Italy very often,(at least twice a year),also the Vatican city.

Those who have eyes can see!! < (for themselves).
I do not think,nor do I imply, that all Bishops/Cardinals live excessively but a great deal do.

One more comment on legality.
In many Countries abortion is “leagal”,do I accept that as ok? of course not!
I think we might just remeber (Pope Benedikt) >> Fides et ratio<<.
Also something Jesus Christ preached…
I close in wishing you God’s blessing, and that with His help you will conquer the “Beast” (cancer).
sincerely “theinquisitive”

 

[bkovacs]

Women religious contacted by the Arizona Daily Star for an article on the current apostolic visitation used the opportunity to criticize the Vatican and express their dissent from Catholic teaching.

“We are closing schools and churches and they are asking the diocese to spend money on this type of thing?” said Sister Lil Mattingly, a Maryknoll Missioner. “We try very hard to review our own lives and how Jesus is calling us to live, but I’d like to call on Rome to work on that.”

Franciscan Sister Elizabeth Ohmann added, “Are we going contrary to Rome’s teachings? I say, ‘Yes, it is contrary to Rome’s teachings.’ But it is not contrary to my own conscience.”

More…

Franciscan Sister Elizabeth Ohmann added, “Are we going contrary to Rome’s teachings? I say, ‘Yes, it is contrary to Rome’s teachings.’ But it is not contrary to my own conscience.”

Real good Franciscan!. Goes against Rome’s teaching.