Has she been excommunicated?

[Abu]

PetersKeys
Joan a theologian? lol. Her arguments are as surface and baseless as most of her feminist adherents…A person who looks up to MARY DALY? lol…

True. Your examples of Peter Kreeft, Fr, Corapi, or Scott Hahn,…Theologians in the older days would be like St Thomas Aquinas, Augustine, Jerome, Bellemarine, Eusebius, were spot on.

As a dissenter, Chittister is not a theologian because that “role is to pursue in a particular way an ever deeper understanding of the word of God found in the inspired Scriptures and handed on by the living Tradition of the Church….in communion with the Magisterium which has been charged with the responsibility of preserving the deposit of faith.” (*Donum Veritatis *(On The Ecclesial Vocation Of The Theologian), C.D.F. 1990, 6).

 

[Tsuwano]

True. Your examples of Peter Kreeft, Fr, Corapi, or Scott Hahn,…Theologians in the older days would be like St Thomas Aquinas, Augustine, Jerome, Bellemarine, Eusebius, were spot on.

As a dissenter, Chittister is not a theologian because that “role is to pursue in a particular way an ever deeper understanding of the word of God found in the inspired Scriptures and handed on by the living Tradition of the Church….in communion with the Magisterium which has been charged with the responsibility of preserving the deposit of faith.” (*Donum Veritatis *(On The Ecclesial Vocation Of The Theologian), C.D.F. 1990, 6).

A simple list of Protestant theologians is enough to prove that your understanding of who and who is not a theologian is severely limited. Mr. Kreeft, Fr. Corapi and Mr. Hahn would all acknowledge the following as important contributers to our understanding of God and his Church, even though they were not in “communion with the Magisterium.” Indeed, even Pope Pius XII stated that Karl Barth was perhaps the most important Christian theologian of the 20th Century. In addition to Barth, I need only mention Friedrich Schleirmacher, Soren Kierkegaard, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Reinhold Nieburh, Emil Brunner, and Paul Tillich. Now, I am not claiming that Sr. Chittister’s thinking is anywhere near the thinking of these gentlemen, but neither do I automatically dismiss her thinking because I disagree with her views on a variety of subjects. Neither do I think the theologian’s role is to simply pat the Church on the back or to think only within prescribed bounderies. The theologian’s role is to describe the human experience of God in all it’s confusing and messy configurations and to discover the numerous ways God is present to us and the ways we respond to God. Sr. Chittister, in spite of your disliking, attempts to do just that.

 

[Abu]

Tsuwano
A simple list of Protestant theologians is enough to prove that your understanding of who and who is not a theologian is severely limited.

Hardly, as you try to limit Christ’s Church in prescribing the role of the theologian as shown in Post #21.

That insights may be offered by non-Catholics does not make them “theologians”, just as some non-Catholic ecclesial communities think they have “priests”.

Further, “In theology this freedom of inquiry is the hallmark of a rational discipline whose object is given by Revelation, handed on and interpreted in the Church under the authority of the Magisterium, and received by faith. These givens have the force of principles. To eliminate them would mean to cease doing theology.” (Donum Veritatis (On The Ecclesial Vocation Of The Theologian), C.D.F. 1990, 12).

What is important is not whether anyone disagrees with Chittister, but whether, as Catholics, they assent to the Church’s understanding of who is a theologian and the principles to which a theologian is required to conform.

“It is clear that all theology, being by definition based on the principles of faith, must remain consistent with these principles. If it contradicts them, it excludes itself from the field of theology. A theology deserves this name only on the condition that it proves, with arguments that are at least probable, that it is in harmony with the principles of faith. This condition limits theological pluralism. When it excludes itself in this way, it is actually ‘philosophy of religion’ and no longer ‘theology’." [Fr Charles Boyer, S.J.,; Quoted in *The Faith and the Theologians, by Msgr Eugene M Kevane from The Teaching Church In Our Time, Daughters of St Paul, 1978].

 

[TMC]

Sr. Chittister is a Benedictine sister in good standing. It is both uncharitable and a violation of forum rules to suggest that she is not.

 

[Abu]

TMC
Sr. Chittister is a Benedictine sister in good standing. It is both uncharitable and a violation of forum rules to suggest that she is not.

It is a form of myopia to feel that anything goes. Public opposition to the Magisterium is dissent, and as such should be so judged, as commanded, as to actions, writing and speech, against truth.

Apart from commanding the woman found in adultery to “go and sin no more” the Christ commanded us to
“Stop judging by appearances, but judge justly.” (Jn 7:24).
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but underneath are ravenous wolves. By their fruits you will know them” (Mt 7:15, 16).
“Every tree that does not bear good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire. So by their fruits you will know them.” (Mt 7:19-20).

 

[diggerdomer]

Ike

THANK you for clearing this up.

For those who wondered if I was writing about Sr. Chittister–no, if only! Because I have never met Sr. Chittister, but the woman I am talking about is someone we have known since she was in 1st grade. She came from a wonderful, devout Catholic family, and attended Catholic school from 1st grade through high school. All during this time, she was in the goody-goody group at school, too, and was religious.

And then she went off to a very liberal Ivy league school and came back a militant lesbian and leftist. Her entire life now centers around lesbianism and attacking the Catholic church.

I know we can never judge others, but I am desperately worried about the state of her soul. She has been so involved in the ‘ordination’ of woman ‘priests’ that I wondered if she had been excommunicated. I thought I could bring that up and it might jolt her back into the church.

She has, indeed, published numerous articles attacking Catholic dogma, while claiming to be a Catholic. And she is endlessly quoted in our local newspaper as if she were a practicing Catholic.

I am however queasy at the idea of writing to the local bishop. What do other people think?

And God bless and thanks to everyone who replied, Annem

Thanks for clarifying. Again, I’ll ask, what does your bishop say?

If your bishop has said nothing, then it’s most likely she is not excommunicated (to get back to your original post).

 

[diggerdomer]

True. Your examples of Peter Kreeft, Fr, Corapi, or Scott Hahn,…Theologians in the older days would be like St Thomas Aquinas, Augustine, Jerome, Bellemarine, Eusebius, were spot on.

As a dissenter, Chittister is not a theologian because that “role is to pursue in a particular way an ever deeper understanding of the word of God found in the inspired Scriptures and handed on by the living Tradition of the Church….in communion with the Magisterium which has been charged with the responsibility of preserving the deposit of faith.” (*Donum Veritatis *(On The Ecclesial Vocation Of The Theologian), C.D.F. 1990, 6).

The Catholic Church nowhere teaches that Sr. Chittister or anyone is “not a theologian” because of the quotation you cite.

Eusebius is a questionable citation for a theologian. An historian, yes, but his writings are not considered truly theological by many (if not all) scholars.

(p.s. Bellarmine, not Bellemarine)

 

[diggerdomer]

It is a form of myopia to feel that anything goes. Public opposition to the Magisterium is dissent, and as such should be so judged, as commanded, as to actions, writing and speech, against truth.

Apart from commanding the woman found in adultery to “go and sin no more” the Christ commanded us to
“Stop judging by appearances, but judge justly.” (Jn 7:24).
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but underneath are ravenous wolves. By their fruits you will know them” (Mt 7:15, 16).
“Every tree that does not bear good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire. So by their fruits you will know them.” (Mt 7:19-20).

No, public opposition to the Magisterium is not dissent.

Many people publicly oppose the Magisterium, but it’s not dissent if they are not Catholic.

If they are Catholic, simply disagreeing with a given teaching is not necessarily dissent. The specific teaching needs to be considered, as well as the specific way it’s being presented that the person questions. If it’s simply a matter of the way a given teaching is presented, then it’s not necessarily dissent. If it’s a matter that is open to theological speculation and further refinement, then it’s not dissent.

 

[Abu]

diggerdomer
If they are Catholic, simply disagreeing with a given teaching is not necessarily dissent. The specific teaching needs to be considered, as well as the specific way it’s being presented that the person questions. If it’s simply a matter of the way a given teaching is presented, then it’s not necessarily dissent. If it’s a matter that is open to theological speculation and further refinement, then it’s not dissent.

On Chittister, whom we are examining, she is a well-known dissenter against the definitive infallible doctrine in the Apostolic Epistle *Ordinatio Sacerdotalis *on men-only priests. Dissent is “public opposition to the Magisterium of the Church.” (Instruction on the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian Donum Veritatis], CDF 1990, #32). There is no room for speculation here.

We are dealing with her specific dissent here, and the role of a theologian: “In theology this freedom of inquiry is the hallmark of a rational discipline whose object is given by Revelation, handed on and interpreted in the Church under the authority of the Magisterium, and received by faith. These givens have the force of principles. To eliminate them would mean to cease doing theology.” (*Donum Veritatis *(On The Ecclesial Vocation Of The Theologian), C.D.F. 1990, 12).
[My underlining].

Thus her dissent exposes the fact of her “ceasing to do theology.” The idea that every Catholic scholar so dissenting must be so labeled publicly by the Magisterium, to be seen as such, happens not to be a reality as Fr Echert affirms.

Answer by Fr. John Echert (EWTN) on 24/1/02:
In fact, in recent decades Rome has been rather cautious and even slow to act against some dissident theologians and renegade bishops, for reasons known to Rome I imagine. As you note, a lack of condemnation or censure from the Vatican in the present times is not the equivalent of an endorsement. In fact, until the very end, Jesus Christ kept to himself the sinister character and corrupt behavior of Judas Iscariot rather than expose him to the other apostles, even as he stole from the purse of the poor and made plans to betray the Son of God into the hands of sinners.

 

[diggerdomer]

On Chittister, whom we are examining, she is a well-known dissenter against the definitive infallible doctrine in the Apostolic Epistle *Ordinatio Sacerdotalis *on men-only priests. Dissent is “public opposition to the Magisterium of the Church.” (Instruction on the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian Donum Veritatis], CDF 1990, #32). There is no room for speculation here.

We are dealing with her specific dissent here, and the role of a theologian: “In theology this freedom of inquiry is the hallmark of a rational discipline whose object is given by Revelation, handed on and interpreted in the Church under the authority of the Magisterium, and received by faith. These givens have the force of principles. To eliminate them would mean to cease doing theology.” (*Donum Veritatis *(On The Ecclesial Vocation Of The Theologian), C.D.F. 1990, 12).
[My underlining].

Thus her dissent exposes the fact of her “ceasing to do theology.” The idea that every Catholic scholar so dissenting must be so labeled publicly by the Magisterium, to be seen as such, happens not to be a reality as Fr Echert affirms.

Answer by Fr. John Echert (EWTN) on 24/1/02:
In fact, in recent decades Rome has been rather cautious and even slow to act against some dissident theologians and renegade bishops, for reasons known to Rome I imagine. As you note, a lack of condemnation or censure from the Vatican in the present times is not the equivalent of an endorsement. In fact, until the very end, Jesus Christ kept to himself the sinister character and corrupt behavior of Judas Iscariot rather than expose him to the other apostles, even as he stole from the purse of the poor and made plans to betray the Son of God into the hands of sinners.

Ordinatio Sacerdotalis is not universally recognized as an exercise of infallible teaching.

The simple fact that there is debate is enough evidence to prove such.

So, anyone raising questions about the teaching in Ordination Sacerdotalis is not de facto excommunicated, nor heretical etc.

Fr. John Echert’s opinions are on the same level as Sr. Chittister’s. Neither are magisterial teachings.

 

[puzzleannie]

There is a woman in my city who heads a number of lesbian groups, yet she describes herself as a Catholic, and is forever being quoted in newspaper articles as a source for Catholic opinion.

The reason I wondered if she was excommunicated is that she has also been heavily involved in the whole women ‘priests’ movement, wrote articles about them, gave speeches at their ‘ordinations’ and so on.

if this woman is a public figure, you can call the bishop’s office and ask, usually the vicar general is the contact person. if she participated in a so-called women’s ordination she is automatically excommunicated but since you don’t state the extent of that participation it is not for us to say here. What would be the point of such a letter to the editor?

…

from your descrip it sounds almost like Joan chrisster… is she really manly looking? short hair? mens clothing?? bullish?? obese?

that’s it, I am letting my hair grow and losing weight today
if you are publicly stating the Sr. Joan Chittister OSB is everything OP describes including the sexual orientation you had better have some facts to back you up, and you had better review forum rules about criticizing clergy and religious by name. you could also look up “detraction” in the CCC. Just because a person connected with the Church–and OP does not say this about the woman he mentions–holds and teaches views you disagree with does not give you the right to demean her person. Confine your remarks to the teachings and speech themselves if you wish to be taken seriously.

 

[puzzleannie]

…

from your descrip it sounds almost like Joan chrisster… is she really manly looking? short hair? mens clothing?? bullish?? obese?

that’s it, I am letting my hair grow and losing weight today
if you are publicly stating the Sr. Joan Chittister OSB is everything OP describes including the sexual orientation you had better have some facts to back you up, and you had better review forum rules about criticizing clergy and religious by name. you could also look up “detraction” in the CCC. Just because a person connected with the Church–and OP does not say this about the woman he mentions–holds and teaches views you disagree with does not give you the right to demean her person. Confine your remarks to the teachings and speech themselves if you wish to be taken seriously.

 

[Abu]

diggerdomer
Ordinatio Sacerdotalis is not universally recognized as an exercise of infallible teaching.

So what? Such a statement eloquently displays the dissent which the Magisterium clearly identifies, and the confusion arising from this, and cannot alter the fact that it is definitive infallible doctrine.

Such confusion also ridicules Vatican I’s dogma of papal infallibility, Pastor Aeternus.

Since when is “universal recognition” required for an infallible doctrine?

 

[diggerdomer]

So what? Such a statement eloquently displays the dissent which the Magisterium clearly identifies, and the confusion arising from this, and cannot alter the fact that it is definitive infallible doctrine.

No it doesn’t. And the Catholic Church does not teach that Ordinatio Sacerdotalis is an exercise of teaching infallibly. If you disagree, cite the reference? And please of course include Canon Law 749.

Such confusion also ridicules Vatican I’s dogma of papal infallibility, Pastor Aeternus.

I am not confused about what Vatican I taught.

Since when is “universal recognition” required for an infallible doctrine?

Read what Vatican II teaches in Lumen Gentium.

 

[Abu]

diggerdomer
Your quotes are from Abu, and I ask again: since when has “universal recognition” been required for a papal doctrine or dogma to be infallible? There is no such doctrine or dogma.

The Apostolic Epistle Ordinatio Sacerdotalis contains a definitive, infallible papal doctrine on men-only priests, requiring no approval from anyone. Face reality.

 

[PetersKeys]

Sr. Chittister is a Benedictine sister in good standing. It is both uncharitable and a violation of forum rules to suggest that she is not.

actually no, LCWR was visited by the Vatican because of heterodox teachings that Chittister was promoting. Joan bemoaned and whined the whole time during it. She even received warning from the bishop because she was going to attend an illicit mass…

If Joan is truly in “good standing” then so is Nancy Pelosi…then again acts of scandal and heresy effect ones standing in the Church so much so that the bishop does not have to declare a formal excommunication…

No it doesn’t. And the Catholic Church does not teach that Ordinatio Sacerdotalis is an exercise of teaching infallibly. If you disagree, cite the reference?

you really must have no concept of what the ordinary magestarium is.

I have been astonished over the past few days at how many commentators,
including Catholics widely known for their orthodoxy, have hastened to
state that the Pope’s recent Apostolic Letter, “Ordinatio Sacerdotalis”, is
not infallible. In fact, it is a textbook case of infallibility in action.

The operative paragraph in this short document is the final substantive
paragraph, immediately preceding the Apostolic Blessing:

 "Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a
  matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church's
  divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming
  the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no
  authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and
  that **this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's
  faithful**."

It is clear that John Paul II is saying that by his role as Pontiff (ex cathedra), he is declaring a judgment regarding faith and morals to be definitively held by the whole Church, and that judgment is therefore infallible.

 

[diggerdomer]

diggerdomer
Your quotes are from Abu, and I ask again: since when has “universal recognition” been required for a papal doctrine or dogma to be infallible? There is no such doctrine or dogma.

The Apostolic Epistle Ordinatio Sacerdotalis contains a definitive, infallible papal doctrine on men-only priests, requiring no approval from anyone. Face reality.

My point is that the Pope, when teaching infallibly, is not acting unilaterally, apart from the Church (meaning apart from the college of Bishops and apart from all the faithful).

Read Lumen Gentium, para 12, 18-25.

No one says that the Pope’s teaching in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis requires approval from anyone, merely that it’s not clear that it’s taught infallibly.

 

[Abu]

diggerdomer
My point is that the Pope, when teaching infallibly, is not acting unilaterally, apart from the Church (meaning apart from the college of Bishops and apart from all the faithful).
Read Lumen Gentium, para 12, 18-25.
No one says that the Pope’s teaching in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis requires approval from anyone, merely that it’s not clear that it’s taught infallibly.

Vatican I (Pastor Aeternus, Chap 4, #9, an infallible dogma) is the basis for understanding infallibility and defines that for infallibility to be exercised the Pope must teach:
(a) ex cathedra (from the Chair of Peter), that is as Shepherd and Teacher of all Christians,
(b) speaking with Peter’s apostolic authority to the whole Church,
(c) defining a doctrine of faith and morals.
“Therefore, such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the Church, irreformable.”

The Holy Father clearly conformed to this dogma in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis:
4. “Although the teaching that priestly ordination is to be reserved to men alone has been preserved by the constant and universal Tradition of the Church and firmly taught by the Magisterium in its more recent documents, at the present time in some places it is nonetheless considered still open to debate, or the Church’s judgment that women are not to be admitted to ordination is considered to have a merely disciplinary force.

“Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church’s divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.”
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_22051994_ordinatio-sacerdotalis_en.html

The Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, (*Lumen Gentium *12), of Vatican II makes it clear that the sensus fidei is a reality only when the faithful obey the Magisterium:
“The whole body of the faithful who have an anointing that comes from the holy one (cf. 1 Jn 2:20, 27) cannot err in matters of belief. This characteristic is shown in the supernatural appreciation of the faith (sensus fidei) of the whole people, when, ‘from the bishops to the last of the faithful’ they manifest a universal consent in matters of faith and morals. By this appreciation of the faith, aroused and sustained by the spirit of truth, the People of God, guided by the sacred teaching authority (Magisterium), and obeying it, receive not the mere word of men, but truly the word of God (cf. 1 Th 2:13), the faith delivered once for all to the saints (cf. Jude 3).”

 

[diggerdomer]

Vatican I (Pastor Aeternus, Chap 4, #9, an infallible dogma) is the basis for understanding infallibility

No, everything the Church teaches, including that following Vatican I, is the basis for understanding infallibility. Vatican I only dealt with papal infallibility. Vatican II completed Vatican I’s teaching.

Catholics cannot base their understanding of infallibility only on what Vatican I teaches. Catholics also need to understand the teaching of Vatican II, the Catechism, Canon Law, etc.

Right?

 

[diggerdomer]

The Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, (*Lumen Gentium *12), of Vatican II makes it clear that the sensus fidei is a reality only when the faithful obey the Magisterium:

Where does Lumen Gentium 12 include the criterion of obeying the Magisterium? I see where it indicates the Faithful need to obey the Word of God.