U.S.: Franciscans side with the LCWR

[catharina]

This is just way too confusing for me now. It’s bad enough that the Jesuits have done more harm my faith at my university then to help it grow, but now the Franciscans? I could never agree on everything pertaining to Franciscan spirituality, but what happened to practicing silence and humility. I hear it all the time on the TC forum that it’s better to be silent and humble and accept the authority unless we are being asked to commit sin. **Even if the Franciscans are not opposing Rome on moral or doctrine it still feels like **they have chosen their side by putting in their opinion

Your post is interesting, of course.
Yet we are NOT to be dependent on
our “feelings” re the workings of religious.

 

[archangel04]

Your post is interesting, of course.
Yet we are NOT to be dependent on
our “feelings” re the workings of religious.

Lol and that’s what most of us on the TC forum including myself have said such a long time, but we are ignored! So why is this different?

 

[catharina]

Lol and that’s what most of us on the TC forum including myself have said such a long time, but we are ignored! So why is this different?

Can’t imagine what you mean.
I’ve been at CA a while now,
I’m 66 yrs old and I can’t recall
anyone disagreeing about this.

???

 

[archangel04]

Can’t imagine what you mean.
I’ve been at CA a while now,
I’m 66 yrs old and I can’t recall
anyone disagreeing about this.

???

I don’t want to derail the thread, but just make it quick…many people argue with us on the TC forum on the form of the mass. Many people say they like how certain form of the mass feels to them or certain practices i.e. holding hands during the our father. Many people have argue the we should not follow on feelings alone because feelings constantly change. Others will argue that feelings come from God so it must be good. But that’s all I will say on that because it’s not part of the discussion.

 

[JReducation]

This is just way too confusing for me now. It’s bad enough that the Jesuits have done more harm my faith at my university then to help it grow, but now the Franciscans? I could never agree on everything pertaining to Franciscan spirituality, but what happened to practicing silence and humility. I hear it all the time on the TC forum that it’s better to be silent and humble and accept the authority unless we are being asked to commit sin. Even if the Franciscans are not opposing Rome on moral or doctrine it still feels like they have chosen their side by putting in their opinion.

The brothers are not taking sides here. They are making two statements. Go back and read my posts. They are not disobeying the Holy See. They have a right to put in their opinion. They are ordinaries. I can’t understand which part of that word, ORDINARY is so foreign to people here.

Religious ordinaries are equivalent to bishops. In this case, they have more authority than bishops. Bishops are not allowed to insert themselves in this situation. Religious ordinaries are. They are exercising their legal right to opine that the CDF’s reaction is excessive and that the LCWR and CDF need to remember that there is a law on how to handle conflicts between bishops and religious. Finally, they have reminded the sisters that they are their brothers. None of this is taking a side. It may be too early to have made this statement, but it’s not contrary to the Church or out of their competency.

From Bishop Leonard Blair, Bishop Blair was appointed by the Vatican in 2008 as the apostolic delegate to conduct the doctrinal assessment of the LCWR for the CDF. This year he was appointed to assist Archbishop Peter Sartain of Seattle in overseeing the renewal of the LCWR.

catholicchronicle.org/index.php/Statements/reality-check-the-lcwr-cdf-and-the-doctrinal-assessment.html

Some of the Bishop’s points:

•In the keynote address at the LCWR 1997 annual assembly, Sister Sandra Schneiders, IHM “proposed that the decisive issue for women religious is the issue of faith: ‘It can no longer be taken for granted that the members [of a given congregation] share the same faith.’”
•In the keynote address at the 2004 joint annual assembly of the LCWR and the Conference of Major Superiors of Men, Father Michael Crosby, OFMCap said, “We still have to worship a God that the Vatican says ‘wills that women not be ordained.’ That god is literally ‘unbelievable.’ It is a false god; it cannot be worshipped.”
•In the keynote address at the LCWR 2007 annual assembly, Sister Laurie Brink, OP spoke about four “directions” religious congregations seemed to be moving, saying “not one of the four is better or worse than the others.” One of those models was “sojourning,” which she said “involves moving beyond the church, even beyond Jesus. A sojourning congregation is no longer ecclesiastical. It has grown beyond the bounds of institutional religion” and “in most respects is Post-Christian.” She also characterized as “courageous” the decision by one group of women religious to “step outside the church.”

Those look like some very Doctrinal points to my humble, poorly educated eyes.
If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, and swims like a duck. Just sayin’.

Look, anyone with the sense to get out of the rain cannot help but see there is a war beginning for the Soul of the Church. Have we been here before? Yes. Has Holy Mother Church survived these past assaults? Yes. But ignoring the current crisis, or simply burying ones head in the sand and hoping it will blow over is pure cowerdice. We are charged to beleive, and defend Our Faith. Satan uses division and cowerdice to further the loss of souls. The time is comming, quickly, when we will have to Choose. And I Choose Christ and His Church, Headed by The Successor of St. Peter.
All of the Politicians, theologians, dissenting Priests and Religious can return to the True Faith, or suffer the consequences of their own free will!

the Second Epistle of St. Paul to Timothy, Ch. 3

"[1] Know also this, that, in the last days, shall come dangerous times. [2] Men shall be lovers of themselves, covetous, haughty, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, wicked, [3] Without affection, without peace, slanderers, incontinent, unmerciful, without kindness, [4] Traitors, stubborn, puffed up, and lovers of pleasures more than of God: [5] Having an appearance indeed of godliness, but denying the power thereof. Now these avoid.

[6] For of these sort are they who creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, who are led away with divers desires: [7] Ever learning, and never attaining to the knowledge of the truth. [8] Now as Jannes and Mambres resisted Moses, so these also resist the truth, men corrupted in mind, reprobate concerning the faith. [9] But they shall proceed no farther; for their folly shall be manifest to all men, as theirs also was. [10] But thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, love, patience,

*[8] Jannes and Mambres: The magicians of king Pharao. *

[11] Persecutions, afflictions: such as came upon me at Antioch, at Iconium, and at Lystra: what persecutions I endured, and out of them all the Lord delivered me. [12] And all that will live godly in Christ Jesus, shall suffer persecution. [13] But evil men and seducers shall grow worse and worse: erring, and driving into error. [14] But continue thou in those things which thou hast learned, and which have been committed to thee: knowing of whom thou hast learned them; [15] And because from thy infancy thou hast known the holy scriptures, which can instruct thee to salvation, by the faith which is in Christ Jesus."

The ministers did not endorse the problems. They offered fraternal support to the sisters, not the same thing. Why are you bringing it up?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[JReducation]

I appreciate you sharing your views Br. JR.

The silly notions of conspiracies is above you. We’ll disagree on what was shared here by the CDF and move on.

You don’t truly believe that these seven are representative of a conspiracy of 24,000 or worse, that they flew this letter under the radar and no Franciscan has noticed it?

Your post is interesting, of course.
Yet we are NOT to be dependent on
our “feelings” re the workings of religious.

Lol and that’s what most of us on the TC forum including myself have said such a long time, but we are ignored! So why is this different?

Can’t imagine what you mean.
I’ve been at CA a while now,
I’m 66 yrs old and I can’t recall
anyone disagreeing about this.

???

I don’t want to derail the thread, but just make it quick…many people argue with us on the TC forum on the form of the mass. Many people say they like how certain form of the mass feels to them or certain practices i.e. holding hands during the our father. Many people have argue the we should not follow on feelings alone because feelings constantly change. Others will argue that feelings come from God so it must be good. But that’s all I will say on that because it’s not part of the discussion.

I just go soooooooo lost. I think I’ll go sit over there --------------->

Let me know when I can jump in again.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[catharina]

You don’t truly believe that these seven are representative of a conspiracy of 24,000 or worse, that they flew this letter under the radar and no Franciscan has noticed it?

I just go soooooooo lost. I think I’ll go sit over there --------------->

Let me know when I can jump in again.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

DITTO -
but I have no popcorn.
Enjoys yours with your brothers!

 

[Ecoclimber]

Catholic church in US divided after Rome seeks to crack down on ‘radical feminism’
Ton Kington, Rome The Guardian U.K.

…On Tuesday, Pat Farrell and William Levada will clash in Rome at the climax of a raging row over what Catholicism means for women. It will be a confrontation that pits America’s increasingly independent and broad-minded nuns against the Vatican’s male guardians of the faith. “Pat Farrell knows it will be daunting, but she sees the importance of this meeting for the whole Catholic community,” said her spokeswoman, Sister Annmarie Sanders.

The showdown follows the claim by Levada’s department that Farrell’s Leadership Conference of Women Religious, the umbrella organisation for most US orders, has been promoting “radical feminism” and glossing over the Vatican’s hard line on gay marriage and abortion…

 

[Elizabeth502]

Ecoclimber:
Not meaning to start any fights here, I nevertheless have to ask: The Guardian, seriously?


Here’s a sampling of some of the incendiary (sensationalist) rhetoric from the article:

“Rebel U.S. Nuns…” (the headline)

“On Tuesday, Pat Farrell and William Levada will clash in Rome at the climax of a raging row…”

“It will be a confrontation that pits America’s increasingly independent and broad-minded nuns against the Vatican’s male guardians of the faith.” [political, much? ]

“The showdown…”

“To set the sisters straight…”

“seven groups of US Franciscan friars denounced the Vatican crackdown…”

“[Levada] has a habit of rapping nuns’ knuckles…”

(You get the picture.)

 

[Dirt]

The brothers are not taking sides here. They are making two statements. Go back and read my posts. They are not disobeying the Holy See. They have a right to put in their opinion. They are ordinaries. I can’t understand which part of that word, ORDINARY is so foreign to people here.

Religious ordinaries are equivalent to bishops. In this case, they have more authority than bishops. Bishops are not allowed to insert themselves in this situation. Religious ordinaries are. They are exercising their legal right to opine that the CDF’s reaction is excessive and that the LCWR and CDF need to remember that there is a law on how to handle conflicts between bishops and religious. Finally, they have reminded the sisters that they are their brothers. None of this is taking a side. It may be too early to have made this statement, but it’s not contrary to the Church or out of their competency.

The ministers did not endorse the problems. They offered fraternal support to the sisters, not the same thing. Why are you bringing it up?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

•In the keynote address at the 2004 joint annual assembly of the LCWR and the Conference of Major Superiors of Men, **Father Michael Crosby, OFMCap **said, “We still have to worship a God that the Vatican says ‘wills that women not be ordained.’ That god is literally ‘unbelievable.’ It is a false god; it cannot be worshipped.”

Sombody was endorsing something, no?

And to your point on what Bishops can and cannot do Bishop Blair points out in his assesment that the LCWR was established by an act of the Holy See and is therefore accountable to it and it’s advisors as to doctrine and teachings. The correction is for the LCWR, not the many different orders of Sisters.

 

[JReducation]

•In the keynote address at the 2004 joint annual assembly of the LCWR and the Conference of Major Superiors of Men, **Father Michael Crosby, OFMCap **said, “We still have to worship a God that the Vatican says ‘wills that women not be ordained.’ That god is literally ‘unbelievable.’ It is a false god; it cannot be worshipped.”

Sombody was endorsing something, no?

And to your point on what Bishops can and cannot do Bishop Blair points out in his assesment that the LCWR was established by an act of the Holy See and is therefore accountable to it and it’s advisors as to doctrine and teachings. The correction is for the LCWR, not the many different orders of Sisters.

Fr. Michael Crosby’s positions are his, not those of the Franciscan family or of the major superiors. What happened after he said that is confidential. No Franciscan is ever going to tell you. If you notice, he has never made this statement again.

Even if the major superiors held such positions, which they do not, they have a right to speak on this, because they are ordinaries. You and others seem bent on denying them this right and you also seem bent on accusing them of something that they did not do. They have not endorsed anything or anyone.

As far as the bishops and the LCWR, I never said what you are implying. Everyone knows that all religious, except diocesan religious, answer to the Holy See.

The Ministers are simply stating what the Holy See itself established, that conflicts between bishops and religious are to be dealt in a council made up of superiors and bishops. The law does not apply to individual communities. It only applies to groups like the LCWR, the CMSWR, NARB, and CMSMR. I can assure this, because I am a major superior.

This takes us back full circle to the only question that can really be asked here and that is why didn’t they wait until the sisters get back from their interview with Bishop Levada this coming week? Your guess is a good as mine. We’d be speculating if we try to answer that question now.

 

[iloveangels]

•In the keynote address at the 2004 joint annual assembly of the LCWR and the Conference of Major Superiors of Men, **Father Michael Crosby, OFMCap **said, “We still have to worship a God that the Vatican says ‘wills that women not be ordained.’ That god is literally ‘unbelievable.’ It is a false god; it cannot be worshipped.”

Sombody was endorsing something, no?

And to your point on what Bishops can and cannot do Bishop Blair points out in his assesment that the LCWR was established by an act of the Holy See and is therefore accountable to it and it’s advisors as to doctrine and teachings. The correction is for the LCWR, not the many different orders of Sisters.

Yes, and apparently this quote is not hearsay. I see it was reported by Catholic World Report, June 9, 2012, even though it apparently was said at a 2004 LCWR annual convention or whatever they call their meetings. I’m sure this isn’t the first time it’s hit print though. It’s just his own opinion, and as far as laypeople are concerned, people should be aware of it, and then simply take it for what it’s worth.

 

[JReducation]

Yes, and apparently this quote is not hearsay. I see it was reported by Catholic World Report, June 9, 2012, even though it apparently was said at a 2004 LCWR annual convention or whatever they call their meetings. I’m sure this isn’t the first time it’s hit print though.

There are several problems with this report.

1. Fr. Michael does not belong to the Observants. It is the Observant superiors who wrote this letter.
2. Even if he did belong to the Observants, there is no indication that the superiors agree with him.
3. He has never made that comment again.
4. Finally, Fr. Michael is not a superior. He is a brother like any other. His voice carries no authority in the community, unless he’s at a community chapter.

This quote adds nothing to this discussion. It looks more like an attempt to dig up as much dirt as possible to impugn the good name of the Observant Franciscan superiors and to discredit them.

That’s an unfortunate act. It suggests that the person who posted the citation knows very little about Franciscan life and government or has an ax to grind with Franciscans. This does raise concerns when Catholics who profess to be Orthodox and faithful to the Church make attempts to detract from the good name of ecclesiastical authorities, which Franciscan Provincial Ministers are, with full rights and duties that come with the Office of Ordinary, including the right to be respected by the faithful.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[JimG]

Here is the most recent article on the subject, in which Bishop Leonard Blair of Toledo responds to distortions in the media reporting, as reported in the Catholic World Report.
catholicworldreport.com/Item/1412/the_biggest_distortion_of_all.aspx

For ordinary Catholics, the matter is not so much a disupte over the rights of ordinaries, and Brother JR has explained that matter quite well. But since the whole affair has become public, for most Catholics who have heard of it, their worry is not so much about lines of authority as whether some in the LCWR leadership are orthodox in their beliefs and teachings.

 

[iloveangels]

Here is the most recent article on the subject, in which Bishop Leonard Blair of Toledo responds to distortions in the media reporting, as reported in the Catholic World Report.
catholicworldreport.com/Item/1412/the_biggest_distortion_of_all.aspx

For ordinary Catholics, the matter is not so much a disupte over the rights of ordinaries, and Brother JR has explained that matter quite well. But since the whole affair has become public, for most Catholics who have heard of it, their worry is not so much about lines of authority as whether some in the LCWR leadership are orthodox in their beliefs and teachings.

Correct. This article is meant to illustrate the things that have gone on in those LCWR conventions. That’s the point of the article. It’s news reporting.

With respect to the friar mentioned in the article, laypeople need to know this information because they consume the products that are produced by people like this man, who sells books and gives talks for the laity and others. And that’s where this really touches the laity. Information isn’t a bad thing. It doesn’t involve the order; this is a man’s opinion expressed at a convention. Take it for what it’s worth.

 

[JReducation]

Here is the most recent article on the subject, in which Bishop Leonard Blair of Toledo responds to distortions in the media reporting, as reported in the Catholic World Report.
catholicworldreport.com/Item/1412/the_biggest_distortion_of_all.aspx

For ordinary Catholics, the matter is not so much a disupte over the rights of ordinaries, and Brother JR has explained that matter quite well. But since the whole affair has become public, for most Catholics who have heard of it, their worry is not so much about lines of authority as whether some in the LCWR leadership are orthodox in their beliefs and teachings.

The Bishop has summarized the situation very well. As we can see from the bishop’s summary and the letter which is being discussed on this thread, there is nothing in that letter that contradicts what the Bishop says are concerns for the CDF. Therefore, the title of this thread is misleading. The ministers have not sided with the LCWR. They didn’t even address the issues that concern the CDF. A statement of fraternity should never be interpreted as taking a side. As Franciscans, all of us have a moral obligation to offer our support for the underdog. That’s who we are and what we have done for 800 years. I don’t see why this is such a surprise to some people.

I work with men who have fathered children and are now thinking of aborting or abandoning them. My first words to them when they come to our center is, “I am your brother and I will walk with you through this journey.” Does that make me an abortionist or am I encouraging fathers to abandon their preborn children? Not at all. It makes me what I am. I’m a son of St. Francis saying what St.Francis says that I must say to anyone who is in trouble of any kind.

Part of the problem is that we live in a world that is magnetized. Everything is north or south, positive or negative. The concept of brotherhood has been redefined to mean agreement or alignment. The term support has been given a political definition meaning to be on board with.

When we were founded in 1209, those words did not mean those things. Brotherhood or fraternity meant family, pure and simple. We all know that in families, people support each other including when one is in a mess and needs help to get out of it.

Support meant to stand by someone who needed you, either because they were in trouble or because they needed you as a resource.

Francis of Assisi and his sons have never been magnetized. We continue to use the language of our Seraphic Father as he meant it to be used in 1209 when he defined it. We continue to do what he commanded. THAT can never change. His words and his commands are etched in stone until a pope decides to change them. None has wanted to do so in 800 years.

The other problem, the bishop also mentions. The content of the report has been reported in such a way that it has raised the eyebrows of many religious. It’s good to see the Bishop clarify what the CDF wants. Because the secular and Catholic press have given us different versions of what the CDF wants. Whichever you read, it’s going to color your reaction.

Correct. This article is meant to illustrate the things that have gone on in those LCWR conventions. That’s the point of the article. It’s news reporting.

Laypeople need to know this information because they consume the products that are produced by people like this man, who sells books and gives talks for the laity and others. And that’s where this really touches the laity. Information isn’t a bad thing. It doesn’t involve the order; this is a man’s opinion expressed at a convention. Take it for what it’s worth.

Fr. Michael Crosby is not a minister nor a member of the OFMs. Additionally, if one looks at Father’s work from that time to today, one sees a very orthodox and very intelligent friar at work. While I cannot say how this was handled by his superiors, I can point to his work today, which is nowhere in the same ballpark as was this statement in 2004.

This thread is not about Fr. Michael. It’s about the letter from the Franciscan Ministers. I believe that we need to get back to that letter and leave those who have nothing to do with the letter out of the discussion.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[Julia_Mae]

Here is what the Franciscans support. Please read before commenting. This is SERIOUS stuff!!.

wdtprs.com/blog/2012/06/fr-james-martin-sj-sticks-up-for-sr-farley-and-her-teachings/

He is just nasty and sarcastic, isn’t he? A real contrast to the Franciscans.

Here’s the deal. All kinds of men in clerical garb have gone way right or left or up or down and we hardly hear a peep.

Women are supposed to shut up, pray and serve dinner.

If the Vatican tried to pull this micro-managing nonsense on the Franciscans, they’d get the boot. Very humbly. But very firmly.

 

[Julia_Mae]

This is just another crack in the dike that leads me to beleive schism is inevitable. The battle lines are being drawn between those who will stand on the Teachings and direction of Holy Mother Church, and those who, like the protestants, want to make it up as they, and the world, goes along. We were warned of this numerous times.

You know what’s funny, though?

To me, the pinko commie liberal cafeteria cath homosexualist feminazi, to me it’s the TRADS who are refusing obedience to the Magesterium. I agree schism looks inevitable without a whole lot of Divine intervention, but the One True Church might not be the one where everyone keeps chanting in Latin and insisting God set us down like Ken and Barbie in the Mattel plastic paradise.

Fact is, none of us know the Mind of God. I’d prefer Oneness to schism. I’d prefer to just be able to go to Mass without all the angst and politics.
All Jesus told us to do is love one another.

So, what’s the deal? Feeding the hungry is too difficult but denigrating our brothers and sisters in the name of… ???

Not Jesus, that’s fer sure.

 

[JReducation]

Here is what the Franciscans support. Please read before commenting. This is SERIOUS stuff!!.

wdtprs.com/blog/2012/06/fr-james-martin-sj-sticks-up-for-sr-farley-and-her-teachings/

wdtprs.com/blog/2012/06/cdf-notification-about-sr-margaret-farleys-dreadful-book-cf-magisterium-of-nuns/

wdtprs.com/blog/2012/04/tweeting-for-the-magisterium-of-nuns/

wdtprs.com/blog/2012/06/lcwr-is-planning-how-not-to-obey/

wdtprs.com/blog/2010/06/lcwrs-long-standing-coverup-of-sexual-abuse-of-children-by-nuns/

wdtprs.com/blog/2012/04/lcwr-gripes-about-being-accountable-to-the-cdf-and-usccb/

wdtprs.com/blog/2012/04/lcwr-having-a-bad-day-vatican-names-archbishop-delegate-continue-watching-lcwr-and-network/

There are 112 Franciscan communities, not a single one is mentioned in any of these quotes.

He is just nasty and sarcastic, isn’t he? A real contrast to the Franciscans.

Father has a rather unique way of expressing his opinions.

Women are supposed to shut up, pray and serve dinner.

I need to tell someone this, because in our constitution it says that the superior of the house mus serve dinner.

If the Vatican tried to pull this micro-managing nonsense on the Franciscans, they’d get the boot. Very humbly. But very firmly.

You lost me here.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[Julia_Mae]

This takes us back full circle to the only question that can really be asked here and that is why didn’t they wait until the sisters get back from their interview with Bishop Levada this coming week? Your guess is a good as mine. We’d be speculating if we try to answer that question now.

I don’t think it takes much speculation to note that they chose the timing themselves. They want the letter read before the meeting. These are not exactly clueless guys, they are Ordinaries. They are saying something by the fact of the letter and that it is public.