Fighting Hard For A Legacy Of Failure

  • Thread starter Thread starter fix
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

fix

Guest
I have thought of this line many times in the last few weeks as the Church has gone through the process of electing the 265th successor to St. Peter. Suddenly, all the grey-haired dissenting Catholic pundits were back in their beloved limelight, stubbornly defending their disastrous tenure as the arbiters of American Church life. Watching them, I thought of my aunt. “Eventually,” I thought, "one of them is going to break down and say, “Hell, we really screwed up, didn’t we?”

How about Richard McBrien saying, “That freakin’ Catholic philosophical tradition may have been oppressive and patriarchal, but damn if it didn’t produce students who were more rigorous in their thought.”

Or how about Andrew Greeley looking up from his latest soft-porn manuscript to shrug, “Humanae Vitae was right. Sex outside of total commitment objectifies women and de-civilizes men.”

But the ones I’m really waiting for are the Joan Chittisters, osb, and the legions of other women who, in one lifetime, devastated the power and tradition of religious communities in the U.S. Certainly, some one of these unhappy women is eventually going to exhale, “Well, that was a mistake.”

Two weeks ago, I spent two days of meetings in a Chicago airport hotel. Waiting at the curb at O’Hare for the Wyndham shuttle, I found myself suddenly surrounded by a flock of overweight, grey-haired women in Walmart clothes and sensible shoes. “Nuns” I knew with certainty.

As we boarded the shuttle, I said to one of the fourteen nuns, “What Congregation are you with, Sister?” The woman was annoyed at me for asking for some reason. I have experienced this cagey coldness before from the secular religious who, I guess, are too busy campaigning for social justice to be nice to strangers on an airport shuttle. The nun murmured back, “Sinsinawa” and then leaned into a conversation with the sister beside her…

churchofthemasses.blogspot.com/2005/05/fighting-hard-for-legacy-of-failure-in.html
 
40.png
fix:
Two weeks ago, I spent two days of meetings in a Chicago airport hotel. Waiting at the curb at O’Hare for the Wyndham shuttle, I found myself suddenly surrounded by a flock of overweight, grey-haired women in Walmart clothes and sensible shoes. “Nuns” I knew with certainty.
Could it be that they can’t afford to buy their clothes other than at Walmart?

And why the “overweight, grey-haired” remark? Are we to judge people by their appearance?

And “sensible shoes”? Should they have been wearing Manolo Blahnick 4" high heels?
 
40.png
Richardols:
Could it be that they can’t afford to buy their clothes other than at Walmart?

And why the “overweight, grey-haired” remark? Are we to judge people by their appearance?

And “sensible shoes”? Should they have been wearing Manolo Blahnick 4" high heels?
I think she was relating how they appeared. Why is that wrong? The person relating it is a professional writer. She was drawing us a picture. What is mean spirited about it?
 
The secular counterpart that I image is a couple of aging surfers on the beach in the gathering dusk reflecting over their waning 60’s & 70’s glory days and eye sight. Ever reluctant to let go of their spent youth and adult prime years in a last sentimental savor of lost legacy that this new generation just does not appreciate. Can you say growing irrelevance?

It makes me wonder what “visions” that the grey-haired dissenting Catholics pundits had in their youth and “dreams” that they are having now that they are old.

Acts**, Chapter 2:17 “**‘It will come to pass in the last days,’ God says, 'that I will pour out a portion of my spirit upon all flesh. Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your young men shall see visions, your old men shall dream dreams’”.
 
40.png
felra:
The secular counterpart that I image is a couple of aging surfers on the beach in the gathering dusk reflecting over their waning 60’s & 70’s glory days and eye sight. Ever reluctant to let go of their spent youth and adult prime years in a last sentimental savor of lost legacy that this new generation just does not appreciate. Can you say growing irrelevance?

It makes me wonder what “visions” that the grey-haired dissenting Catholics pundits had in their youth and “dreams” that they are having now that they are old.

Acts**, Chapter 2:17 “**‘It will come to pass in the last days,’ God says, 'that I will pour out a portion of my spirit upon all flesh. Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your young men shall see visions, your old men shall dream dreams’”.
The problem is, they won’t get to the real work they have to do. They are going to die clinging with gritted teeth to their errors. They are going to see the property and the institutions sold off. So many wonderful places that were acquired through generations of sacrifice by the people of God and the members of their own communities. And they are going to watch it all with unflinching commitment to the revolution. They are so like the nostalgic Marxists who taught me in grad school. Even six years after the wall had smashed down, they just wouldn’t give over that Communism was a failure.
Being stiff-necked isn’t a virtue. It’s just very sad. Somebody needs to tell the secular nuns that.
 
40.png
fix:
She was drawing us a picture. What is mean spirited about it?
Yes, she was drawing a picture, and I think it was intended to put those women down.
 
40.png
Richardols:
Yes, she was drawing a picture, and I think it was intended to put those women down.
I think it is an accurate picture. What part is inaccurate?
 
40.png
Richardols:
Could it be that they can’t afford to buy their clothes other than at Walmart?

And why the “overweight, grey-haired” remark? Are we to judge people by their appearance?

And “sensible shoes”? Should they have been wearing Manolo Blahnick 4" high heels?
Why? Probably because they were “overweight” and “grey-haired”. I think fondly of all the religious I have known who wore anything other than trademark “sensible” shoes of Catholic religious.
 
40.png
fix:
I think she was relating how they appeared. Why is that wrong? The person relating it is a professional writer. She was drawing us a picture. What is mean spirited about it?
not too sure… if the description was of someone who the writer liked, the words would probably have been more closely chosen … …were it the writers mother or sister or aunt or cousin, you probably would have seen adjectives such as: " a woman, not too thin, unextravagent clothes, comfortable shoes, with collegiate graying of the hair that denoted life’s experiences and wisdom… (pardon my lack of same in writing and spelling)… but yes, i’m inclined to agree, i feel there’s a slant in the description…

i could be wrong… probably am:eek:

peace:thumbsup:
 
space ghost:
not too sure… if the description was of someone who the writer liked, the words would probably have been more closely chosen… you probably would have seen adjectives such as: " a woman, not too thin, unextravagent clothes, comfortable shoes, with collegiate graying of the hair that denoted life’s experiences and wisdom…
Exactly my point. There are descriptions and there are descriptions, and the one the writer chose was a putdown of those women. She could have described them as you did above…but she didn’t want to give a positive impression of them, and so wrote as she did.
 
40.png
Richardols:
Exactly my point. There are descriptions and there are descriptions, and the one the writer chose was a putdown of those women. She could have described them as you did above…but she didn’t want to give a positive impression of them, and so wrote as she did.
Let’s see, she should have provided a positive impression of the sisters because???

This blog was not meant to be positive with respect to this kind of Catholic. I don’t think the description of the sisters was particularly meanspirited or unnecessarily hateful. While SpaceGhost’s description is certainly more flattering, is it accurate? Does it make the point that the writer was trying to make? It’s a BLOG Richard, not a documentary.

Quite honestly in my experience with sisters of that era, her description is sadly spot on. Why one would make the sacrifices to become a religious and then dress like everyone else is beyond me. Not necessary to wear the entire headstall but why not some kind of designation that you are a proud member of a long and beautiful tradition? It’s almost as if they are purposely dissing who they are.

Lisa N
 
Lisa N:
Quite honestly in my experience with sisters of that era, her description is sadly spot on. Why one would make the sacrifices to become a religious and then dress like everyone else is beyond me. Not necessary to wear the entire headstall but why not some kind of designation that you are a proud member of a long and beautiful tradition? It’s almost as if they are purposely dissing who they are.Lisa N
Nowhere in the Council documents does it say that the priests and religious should dispense with religious habits, and it never said that habits should be the street clothes of the common man. Vatican II stated that habits are to be an outward sign of consecration. They need to be simple, modest, poor, becoming, and needed to be changed if they were unhealthy or not suited for today’s needs. This is not a new idea, religious habits have changed throughout history, but for obvious reasons priests and nuns wearing secular apparel from a department store does not fit the bill. Pope Paul VI and John Paul II both have told priests and religious that they must wear their religious habit, but many have chosen to ignore the Papacy and the Second Vatican Council.

“The religious habit, an outward mark of consecration to God, should be simple and modest,poor and at the same becoming. In addition it must meet the requirements of health and be suited to the circumstances of time and place and to the needs of the ministry involved. The habits of both men and women religious which do not conform to these norms must be changed.” Perfectae Caritatis17

geocities.com/peterpaulmin/NunsandWearingtheHabit.html
 
…my experience is certainly different then yours…:cool:

I do think that there are ways to get your point accross Pro or Con without reducing people to fat, bald, old, out of style, cheap, or any type of sterotyping…

…none of it germain to the point that was being made…

…it’s very possible the woman was having a bad day… or not!

Peace:thumbsup:
 
Lisa N:
Let’s see, she should have provided a positive impression of the sisters because???

This blog was not meant to be positive with respect to this kind of Catholic. I don’t think the description of the sisters was particularly meanspirited or unnecessarily hateful. While SpaceGhost’s description is certainly more flattering, is it accurate? Does it make the point that the writer was trying to make? It’s a BLOG Richard, not a documentary.

Quite honestly in my experience with sisters of that era, her description is sadly spot on. Why one would make the sacrifices to become a religious and then dress like everyone else is beyond me. Not necessary to wear the entire headstall but why not some kind of designation that you are a proud member of a long and beautiful tradition? It’s almost as if they are purposely dissing who they are.

Lisa N
…my experience is certainly different then yours…:cool:

I do think that there are ways to get your point accross Pro or Con without reducing people to fat, bald, old, out of style, cheap, or any type of sterotyping…

…none of it germain to the point that was being made…

…it’s very possible the woman was having a bad day… or not!

Peace:thumbsup:

 
Lisa N:
I don’t think the description of the sisters was particularly meanspirited or unnecessarily hateful.
Did it have to be meanspirited or hateful to any degree? That’s what I found objectionable.

But, I agree that a writer has a right to describe people any way he or she wants, whether in a praiseworthy or derogatory manner.
 
Lisa N:
Let’s see, she should have provided a positive impression of the sisters because???

This blog was not meant to be positive with respect to this kind of Catholic. I don’t think the description of the sisters was particularly meanspirited or unnecessarily hateful. While SpaceGhost’s description is certainly more flattering, is it accurate? Does it make the point that the writer was trying to make? It’s a BLOG Richard, not a documentary.

Quite honestly in my experience with sisters of that era, her description is sadly spot on. Why one would make the sacrifices to become a religious and then dress like everyone else is beyond me. Not necessary to wear the entire headstall but why not some kind of designation that you are a proud member of a long and beautiful tradition? It’s almost as if they are purposely dissing who they are.

Lisa N
…i am sure if you look long enough, you could find a rotten apple in almost any barrell… and “my experience” with the sisters of the same error thankfully doesn’t mirror yours…

…I do believe that you can describe people without reducing them to fat, bald, cheap, sinister or any sterotype that you could employ to “set a stage” as it were or slant a perception to bolster your personal distaste or opinion of someone, especially when their visual apperance was not even the point of the post…

…heck, she could have been sick, having a bad day, or maybe the tone or the way the writer invaded her space may have seemed threating to her…and then again maybe NOT!..

…but i do believe the author could have gotten the message accross with the same detail without negative observations of his/her perception of taste of clotes, or economic position… IMHO

peace:thumbsup:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top