Vatican demands reform of American nuns' leadership group [CWN]

[curlycool89]

Actually, Jesus started at Cana, a village; Canaan is a large general area corresponding to the Levant.

I plead guilty in the area of not being able to spell (actually I think I copied it from the post I was replying to). Can I get leniency for being an engineering major?

Jesus referred to his mother as “woman”, which I find quite meaningful. She is certainly His Mother too.

sigh, do I really have to do all the research my…

Jesus called Mary “women” because she is the new Eve just as Jesus is the new Adam. Mary’s “yes” in obedience to God was contrast to Eve’s, just as Jesus’ obedience was in contrast to Adam’s disobedience (this feels familiar, it might have been in today’s Office of Readings).

As far as I can tell, no anathema has been attached to the issue of women as priests. I’m no champion of the cause, but it seems to me that if the Pope really wanted to end all discussion on the topic once and for all, he’d declare it anathema like they did at Trent. A nice clear doctrinal statement. If that happens let me know.

Seriously, is this not enough for you?

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.

Bl. JPII said “I declare” and referenced his position as Supreme Pontiff and teacher. Luke 22:32:
[BIBLEDRB]Luke 22:32[/BIBLEDRB]
The verse if referenced because that was Jesus praying for Peter that his faith may not fail, it is closely associated with the Pope’s infallibility.

A letter from the CDF (by Cardinal Ratzinger) confirmed that this teaching is infallible.

Anathema’s are not required to make a teaching official, and it actually shows a serious problem. If you won’t give assent to a teaching unless you are otherwise anathema, then it says to me that you are doing so in fear of punishment and not because you actually believe. It’s like convincing people not to sin because they’ll “go to hell”. You shouldn’t sin because you love God and you wish to follow His plan, not because you fear hell.

This pretty much convinced me:

Or what? See no anathema.

If you only follow out of fear then you are not following, you’re being dragged along.

I pray that you find the courage to follow out of love and obedience, not our of fear of punishment. Because freely choosing to follow is the Freedom from the Law that St. Paul talked about. Freedom from the Law doesn’t mean freedom to do anything; it means you are free to live out the Law in your life without need for the Law. That is true Freedom, living in accord with God’s will as He has revealed through the Church for the love of God (and His Bride) alone.

I began reading this thread with a real interest in what Vatican had to say about the state of woman religious in the US. I have been reading and discussing the “visits” for quite a while. I have many family members who are part of religious orders being both nuns and priests. Having witnessed how much these people have sacrificed to live out the word of God in their lives on a daily basis, I am dismayed and angry at the uncharitable generalities that are stated in this thread. I am so reminded of Jesus’s continual criticism of the Pharisees. There seems to be too many pharisees and not enough apostles at this forum.

Admonishing the sinner is one of the Spiritual Words of Mercy.

What we pray is for all peoples to live according to God’s plan, as He has revealed through the Church. What the world preaches is a false freedom that is in fact slavery, slavery to the senses and slavery to the world.

 

[ellipsis2]

I plead guilty in the area of not being able to spell (actually I think I copied it from the post I was replying to). Can I get leniency for being an engineering major?

sigh, do I really have to do all the research my…

Jesus called Mary “women” because she is the new Eve just as Jesus is the new Adam. Mary’s “yes” in obedience to God was contrast to Eve’s, just as Jesus’ obedience was in contrast to Adam’s disobedience (this feels familiar, it might have been in today’s Office of Readings).

Seriously, is this not enough for you?

Bl. JPII said “I declare” and referenced his position as Supreme Pontiff and teacher. Luke 22:32:
[BIBLEDRB]Luke 22:32[/BIBLEDRB]
The verse if referenced because that was Jesus praying for Peter that his faith may not fail, it is closely associated with the Pope’s infallibility.

A letter from the CDF (by Cardinal Ratzinger) confirmed that this teaching is infallible.

Anathema’s are not required to make a teaching official, and it actually shows a serious problem. If you won’t give assent to a teaching unless you are otherwise anathema, then it says to me that you are doing so in fear of punishment and not because you actually believe. It’s like convincing people not to sin because they’ll “go to hell”. You shouldn’t sin because you love God and you wish to follow His plan, not because you fear hell.

This pretty much convinced me:

If you only follow out of fear then you are not following, you’re being dragged along.

I pray that you find the courage to follow out of love and obedience, not our of fear of punishment. Because freely choosing to follow is the Freedom from the Law that St. Paul talked about. Freedom from the Law doesn’t mean freedom to do anything; it means you are free to live out the Law in your life without need for the Law. That is true Freedom, living in accord with God’s will as He has revealed through the Church for the love of God (and His Bride) alone.

Admonishing the sinner is one of the Spiritual Words of Mercy.

What we pray is for all peoples to live according to God’s plan, as He has revealed through the Church. What the world preaches is a false freedom that is in fact slavery, slavery to the senses and slavery to the world.

This could be considered admonishthesinner.com. There is certainly a lot of that going around. I think that was what the pharisees did before facebook.

 

[bellasbane]

I though progressives liked dialog rather than just being told no. Or is this damned if you do and damned if you don’t night?

Well, you have a clear statement on the LCWR from the Vatican. That ought to make you happy since you’re in the mood for the definite. Even the whiny National Catholic Reporter is saying now, “What’s more, the lawyers say, LCWR has no recourse for appeal of the decision, which the U.S. bishops’ conference announced Wednesday in a press release.” Boom. Stark, they call it. Happy now?

Yeah, I read that this morning. Sr. Joan Chittister doesn’t see much hope for a resolution. She thinks they will have to disband canonically and regroup as an unofficial interest group. Like Hagar out in the wilderness.

 

[jwinch2]

Jason,
Thanks again for the links.
I read them all.

The first two, as you noted, don’t explain what exactly the nuns have said or done that is radically feminist. Still trying to find an article that will explain this.

Google the names of the women, you will find plenty of examples. One thing which pops into my head right off the bat is the protest which was held outside of the Vatican in support of women’s ordination. There are several others.

The second link talks about a group of 100 nuns who were protesting a priest’s excommunication in 2008.
But these 100 nuns seem to come from a different group than this other LCWR group of 60,000 or so that the Vatican is reprimanding. I don’t see “LCWR” next to any names (but you are saying some are members? Are you recognizing them just by names? Do you know how many?)

As I stated above, the women who signed that letter are all within LCWR. They represent much of the leadership. The two organizations are also linked quite closely.

The third link, the blog talking about Barbara Marx Hubbard…yes, that is linked to the group because she is a speaker at their conference in August.
I can see why that would cause a stir or some confusion.

It does seem odd to have a non-Catholic speaker at a Catholic conference, for sure (Hubbard is described as a “Jewish Agnostic” on wiki). But the panelists for this talk include a highly respected nun in the medical field and a columnist for The National Catholic Reporter (not sure who the guy, Tom Fox, is).

But the thing is…their conference program, as far as I can see, doesn’t say what the talk is intended to express. Perhaps it is meant for a healthy debate aroud Hubbard’s ideas, since the panelists surrounding this talk are definitely Catholic.
But if not…although Hubbard talks about “self evolution” and of cosmic stuff and uses terms that are not in the Catholic realm, it doesn’t seem like she is espousing “radical feminist” or anti-Catholic ideas (if she is, I can’t see any so far…please point out.).

Issues have been ongoing for many years. Note that the investigations was began several years ago so it is hardly about this years conference. This is a decades old problem and the Holy See has tried several other ways to bring this about prior to this situation we are in currently.

 

[ellipsis2]

Yeah, I read that this morning. Sr. Joan Chittister doesn’t see much hope for a resolution. She thinks they will have to disband canonically and regroup as an unofficial interest group. Like Hagar out in the wilderness.

It’s a pretty sad state of affairs for women who built Catholicism in America.

 

[ellipsis2]

Google the names of the women, you will find plenty of examples. One thing which pops into my head right off the bat is the protest which was held outside of the Vatican in support of women’s ordination. There are several others.
As I stated above, the women who signed that letter are all within LCWR. They represent much of the leadership. The two organizations are also linked quite closely.

Issues have been ongoing for many years. Note that the investigations was began several years ago so it is hardly about this years conference. This is a decades old problem and the Holy See has tried several other ways to bring this about prior to this situation we are in currently.

The investigation was started in 2009, I believe. It only took three years. How long did it take to investigate inappropriate priestly activity? The women religious are not all in support of the bishops stance onthe health care issue. Coincidence? I’m guessing this project may keep them quite busy. Another coincidence?

 

[jwinch2]

Yeah, I read that this morning. Sr. Joan Chittister doesn’t see much hope for a resolution. She thinks they will have to disband canonically and regroup as an unofficial interest group. Like Hagar out in the wilderness.

I saw that as well. I think she is overestimating her own influence and that of their group. There are dozens of feminist groups out there. The reason she and other sisters have been taken seriously is because of their association with the Catholic Church. If the LCWR no longer operates under the umbrella of the Church, they lose that appeal.

No more visits to the White House and no more getting called for interviews every time something comes around about the Church. They were often the group that provided cover for the political left to do what they wished and claim that Catholics could go ahead and support it. This is one of the major reasons I am happy to see the direction that the CDF is taking. Way too many of the faithful have been led away from the authentic teaching of the Church by these women.

The simple reality is that many of these women left the Church some time ago. If they hadn’t, sister Joan would never be able to suggest what she is.

 

[jwinch2]

Yes, because it gives you part of the story. This is the rest in a nutshell.

In the 17th-19th centuries there were many congregations of sisters formed specifically to teach in particular schools, staff certain hospitals or even to live in particular places. However, they were apostolic, meaning that their work was their reason for being. We’ve talked about this to some extent in our conversations about religious orders and so on elsewhere in this forum.

Anyway, these sisters were sorely needed among the burgeoning poor of the industrial revolution and immigrant cities and all that. These congregations were set up with constitutions, but often no rule, and sometimes they didn’t have foundresses or their foundresses were replaced with others; sometimes they were founded by non-religious and so on. The point of the congregation was the work. Period. They were often even explicit about this. They were teaching or nursing orders.

Now what this set up was a situation where a charism could be no more than a set of lines in a constitution or a custom, like how to turn the corner in a hallway, or how to put on a wimple or how to ask permission to use a pencil which was actually required in some of these congregations. Many sisters taught large groups of children with little more than a high school education or whatever they had entered with. Some of them taught religion with no more training than their own childhood training. This was pre-Vatican II.

Their appearance was allowed to return to a sort of semi-monastic form, because it encouraged respect by the laity and made it easier to do the things they needed to do, such as support themselves. The same thing with some of the practices they adopted and so on. They encouraged vocations, edified the laity and helped the sisters cope, giving them some sort of religious life, although perhaps not the profound training that a Dominican contemplative nun or a Poor Clare sister might expect from her formation.

So, to make a long story short, when Vatican II ordered that the congregations, orders, institutes and all go back to their sources and founders, and concentrate on what they were founded to be, members of these orders were confounded. They had very little, if anything, to go back to. Their apostolates closed; their habits gone; their practices curtailed overnight. And no profound theology or charism like the Benedictines or the Franciscans.

Into the picture strides Dr. Carl Rogers in the IHM example, but variations of this happened to congregations all over. He tried to help them discover who they were, from a transactional analysis viewpoint, using interpersonal encounter methods. And you can about guess what the result was.

To be honest, Dr. Rogers didn’t realize what was going to happen. The 60s & 70s were that hapless and clueless. I know I was there. In fact, he was a Catholic and thought that he was helping them. Well, he helped them all right. Right out of the Church.

Likewise Vatican II. To cause all this turmoil and hurt anyone was not the intention of Vatican II. At all. At all. But people were not prepared for it. And the congregations had not done their work in setting themselves up soundly enough to withstand the future.

Of course, the ancient & medieval orders and other groups that had solid rules, supporting theology and great founders, were nowhere near as affected. You’ll find that most of the real mischief that you’ve heard about wasn’t among them but among the congregations. Not a surprise.

In the years since all this, the remaining sisters have become more sophisticated. Their apostolates are gone. The ones that are young enough serve as administrators, and yes, staff things like the LCWR, CHA and so on. Some of them have left the church without leaving the order because they literally have nowhere else to go. The order has been their home since the age of 18 and all their friends are there. Everything is there.

See the picture?

Now not all sisters have gone this way. In fact, there are many sisters who you never see who are much more faithful. Some are older and spend all their time in the motherhouses. If you go and walk through one at mealtime, you will see many sisters in habit and partial habit but they are often very old. I’ve seen some of this personally. So blanket statements are kind of cruel at this late stage. It’s a sad situation all the way around.

Read the story of Carl Rogers and the IHMs. It’s enlightening. You can find it online in several places.

I have done a bit more digging since you posted this. Thanks by the way, it was interesting.

However, there is one part of your analysis that does not add up completely which is the part of women in societies which had more formation and tradition being the ones that had the least problem. If you look now at the women involved with LCWR and the National Coalition of American Nuns, the same ones who are largely leading the charge on some of these issues, there are many women with OP, OSB, and OFM after their names. Those orders did have founders to look to as well as spiritual fathers and mothers in Francis, Clare, Benedict, Dominic, etc. They could read their venerable writings and see what they intended yet they still ended up somewhere else.

I recognize that all such issues are multifaceted, but I am not seeing a link there. Admittedly, I have not done as much study on the issue as you have.

Peace,

 

[jwinch2]

The investigation was started in 2009, I believe. It only took three years. How long did it take to investigate inappropriate priestly activity? The women religious are not all in support of the bishops stance onthe health care issue. Coincidence? I’m guessing this project may keep them quite busy. Another coincidence?

The timing of the release of the results of the investigation could have been planned, I do not know. It would not surprise me either way. The investigation did not have nearly the scope of the sexual abuse investigation as this organization is small compared to the numbers of priests world wide and with law enforcement involved in the matter, as they should be, it makes internal investigations more complicated.

The project may or may not keep them busy. It may drive some of them to leave religious life all together as well as the Church. I hope that does not happen. I hope that they choose to reconcile with the Church, live their vows, and be faithful witnesses to the Gospel in the world.

 

[bellasbane]

Jesus called Mary “women” because she is the new Eve just as Jesus is the new Adam. Mary’s “yes” in obedience to God was contrast to Eve’s, just as Jesus’ obedience was in contrast to Adam’s disobedience (this feels familiar, it might have been in today’s Office of Readings).

I think Mary’s first words were something along the lines of “that’s impossible” and then Gabriel said something like “No, seriously - look at Elizabeth” and then Mary said, “Well, OK then”. But I don’t really think she was 100% convinced, because she then went to see Elizabeth to verify that what the angel said was true.

That’s the kind of woman I admire. One who isn’t going to just passively let someone tell her what reality to believe, even if that someone is an immortal being sent by God himself.

Seriously, is this not enough for you?

Bl. JPII said “I declare” and referenced his position as Supreme Pontiff and teacher. Luke 22:32:
[BIBLEDRB]Luke 22:32[/BIBLEDRB]
The verse if referenced because that was Jesus praying for Peter that his faith may not fail, it is closely associated with the Pope’s infallibility.

A letter from the CDF (by Cardinal Ratzinger) confirmed that this teaching is infallible.

1. 
   *]I’m not an advocate for women priests.
   *]Papal Infallibility was declared a doctrine of the Church by Vatican I. That’s good enough.
   *]Only the Pope and Church Councils are infallible. Not Cardinals.
   

   Anathema’s are not required to make a teaching official, and it actually shows a serious problem. If you won’t give assent to a teaching unless you are otherwise anathema, then it says to me that you are doing so in fear of punishment and not because you actually believe. It’s like convincing people not to sin because they’ll “go to hell”. You shouldn’t sin because you love God and you wish to follow His plan, not because you fear hell.

   This pretty much convinced me:

   If you only follow out of fear then you are not following, you’re being dragged along.

   I pray that you find the courage to follow out of love and obedience, not our of fear of punishment. Because freely choosing to follow is the Freedom from the Law that St. Paul talked about. Freedom from the Law doesn’t mean freedom to do anything; it means you are free to live out the Law in your life without need for the Law. That is true Freedom, living in accord with God’s will as He has revealed through the Church for the love of God (and His Bride) alone.

   Good for you. Note point #1 above. Don’t worry, I wouldn’t waste so much time posting on this forum if I were motivated by fear, but thank you for your prayers. Prayers are always good.
   

   Admonishing the sinner is one of the Spiritual Words of Mercy.

   And Pride is one of the seven big bads. Ezekiel 28:17
   

   What we pray is for all peoples to live according to God’s plan, as He has revealed through the Church. What the world preaches is a false freedom that is in fact slavery, slavery to the senses and slavery to the world.

   You sound like a Buddhist!
   
   Suffering (dukkha) is caused by craving. This is often expressed as a deluded clinging to a certain sense of existence, to selfhood, or to the things or phenomena that we consider the cause of happiness or unhappiness.
   
   Suffering ends when craving ends. This is achieved by eliminating delusion, thereby reaching a liberated state of Enlightenment (bodhi);
   
   en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism#The_Four_Noble_Truths

 

[fms]

I think Mary’s first words were something along the lines of “that’s impossible” and then Gabriel said something like “No, seriously - look at Elizabeth” and then Mary said, “Well, OK then”. But I don’t really think she was 100% convinced, because she then went to see Elizabeth to verify

that what the angel said was true.

That’s the kind of woman I admire. One who isn’t going to just passively let someone tell her what reality to believe, even if that someone is an immortal being sent by God himself.

Well you think wrong cf. Mary’s own words and what Elizabeth says when Mary visits her.

 

[Ecoclimber]

Well, the Catholic Church is taking a real beating on the MSNBC NEWS site by more than 2200 comments with many Catholics against the Pope. I did my best to put my two cents in so if any of you feel incline to argue the authority of the Pope as the ‘Chair of Peter’ and when it comes to God’s law and the doctrines of the Church and that it is not a democracy, be my guess. Seems the tone has do with the Church doing nothing about their own priests who abuse but the church decides to crack down on the women nuns or something to that effect because of gender bias keeping women as 2nd class citizens.

usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/20/11306372-catholic-nuns-group-stunned-by-vatican-scolding-for-radical-feminist-ideas?pc=25&sp=1150#discussion_nav
Catholic nuns group ‘stunned’ by Vatican scolding for ‘radical feminist’ ideas

Blessings to All,

 

[Dirt]

This entire discussion, along with the topic is a stark example of why The Church needs a full house cleaning! Dissident Nuns, dissident Priests, Dissident Bishops all going about their daily lives following whatever nebulous doctrine they choose, in direct disregard for the actual teachings of the Church. Leading the Faithful astray, confusing the young as to true teaching, and confusing possible converts as to why the should even bother to enter the Church. The actions from the Holy See on this issue, on the Austrian issue, the Irish Church, as well as the efforts to reign in many other dissenters is LONG OVER DUE. We were warned on several occasions in the New Testament that these days would come. The Church has been down this road many times throughout Her History. The Arian crisis was particularly heinous and took several decades to correct. The reformation required Trent to steer the Church back into compliance with sound doctrine. Those who will not give obedience to the Church will go their way, much like the Protestants, forming sect after sect espousing whatever belief system that makes them feel good about themselves. It is, after all what dissenters want. They seem to have an “I want it all, and I want it NOW” attitude regardless of Church teachings and seem to have no qualms at recreating Church teachings to justify whatever position their “itching ears” wish to hear. This will be painful, but it will result in a much more faithful, focused Church where the True Faith will be lived. Those who dissent, who are caught up in the lies of the world, may thrash and cry out all they want. They will not stop the cleansing of the Temple.

Second Epistle Of Saint 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.

Scripture from drbo.org/index.htm

 

[baylee]

This entire discussion, along with the topic is a stark example of why The Church needs a full house cleaning! Dissident Nuns, dissident Priests, Dissident Bishops all going about their daily lives following whatever nebulous doctrine they choose, in direct disregard for the actual teachings of the Church. Leading the Faithful astray, confusing the young as to true teaching, and confusing possible converts as to why the should even bother to enter the Church. The actions from the Holy See on this issue, on the Austrian issue, the Irish Church, as well as the efforts to reign in many other dissenters is LONG OVER DUE. We were warned on several occasions in the New Testament that these days would come. The Church has been down this road many times throughout Her History. The Arian crisis was particularly heinous and took several decades to correct. The reformation required Trent to steer the Church back into compliance with sound doctrine. Those who will not give obedience to the Church will go their way, much like the Protestants, forming sect after sect espousing whatever belief system that makes them feel good about themselves. It is, after all what dissenters want. They seem to have an “I want it all, and I want it NOW” attitude regardless of Church teachings and seem to have no qualms at recreating Church teachings to justify whatever position their “itching ears” wish to hear. This will be painful, but it will result in a much more faithful, focused Church where the True Faith will be lived. Those who dissent, who are caught up in the lies of the world, may thrash and cry out all they want. They will not stop the cleansing of the Temple.

Bravo!

 

[Anna_Claire]

I began reading this thread with a real interest in what Vatican had to say about the state of woman religious in the US. I have been reading and discussing the “visits” for quite a while. I have many family members who are part of religious orders being both nuns and priests. Having witnessed how much these people have sacrificed to live out the word of God in their lives on a daily basis, I am dismayed and angry at the uncharitable generalities that are stated in this thread. I am so reminded of Jesus’s continual criticism of the Pharisees. There seems to be too many pharisees and not enough apostles at this forum.

AMEN!!

 

[Tigg]

I just read “A Marginal Life: Pursuing Religious Holiness in the 21st Century Keynote Address by Laurie Brink, OP” and found it fascinating.

I can see why the Hierarchy is freaking out!

No, the hierarchy is not freaking out but identifying the very source of the cancer:

In a nutshell, from your link above, here it is - THE GREAT HERESY:

Post-modernism allows that both you and I are correct. We are simply viewing the same thing through a different lens.

 

[Corki]

Yeah, I read that this morning. Sr. Joan Chittister doesn’t see much hope for a resolution. She thinks they will have to disband canonically and regroup as an unofficial interest group. Like Hagar out in the wilderness.

Hopefully some of the congregations will join the CMSRW instead. At least if they (the new group) are an unofficial group, it will be less confusing when they throw their support to causes that confuse Catholics such as womens ordination, VOTF and pro-contraception activism.

If that happens, the Bishops should insist that media stop using leaders from the group as spokeswomen for the Church since they will no longer be recognized. I was out last night with a group of mostly non-Catholic friends at an event being held at a Catholic school. Knowing I was Catholic, they were asking lots of questions about this “news”. Evidently Sister Chittister was on TV talking about the Vatican report. My non-Catholic friends were shocked that a Catholic nun would say such ugly things about the Church. I am looking for a video - I think it may have been CNN. If anyone knows and can post it, I would like to see first hand what they were talking about.

I do understand how the sisters feel they are being cornered. This situation is not entirely of their own making and it has been building up for decades. That being said, I don’t buy thier professed “shock” at the results. The visitations started over **3 years ago **which means that the Vatican was becoming concerned long before that. Donna Steichen’s books were certainly known to the sisters and they must have assumed that the Vatican was also aware. In the past several years, some sisters have been publically corrected by the Vatican and by individual Bishops for some of the same things mentioned in the report - tacit approval of abortion (the sister who volunteered at an abortion clinic), support for womens ordination, LCRWs sponsorship of anti-Catholic events (such as the ACC conference in Detroit last year), to name a few.

This should not be coming as a big surprise the the LCRW.

 

[opus101]

I began reading this thread with a real interest in what Vatican had to say about the state of woman religious in the US. I have been reading and discussing the “visits” for quite a while. I have many family members who are part of religious orders being both nuns and priests. Having witnessed how much these people have sacrificed to live out the word of God in their lives on a daily basis, I am dismayed and angry at the uncharitable generalities that are stated in this thread. I am so reminded of Jesus’s continual criticism of the Pharisees. There seems to be too many pharisees and not enough apostles at this forum.

It is not the good that these people have done that is being corrected - if you have read about the report, they were commended for those good things. However, they (in general) are guilty of grave omissions in the realm of life issues, and grave commissions in the theological/doctrinal realm. This is very serious, and they have caused many to falter because of this.

 

[opus101]

It’s a pretty sad state of affairs for women who built Catholicism in America.

They’ve also had a very big hand in destroying it. And don’t forget, it’s not all women religious who are in this state of rebellious and heretical infamy. Many nuns and sisters in the other conference also had a hand in building Catholicism in America. And, hopefully, there are many religious sisters in LCWR who have never agreed with the organization’s tenets. Hopefully, they will have the courage to remove themselves from it.

I think the big controversy that this will create could have been avoided if things had been corrected decades ago.

 

[Mickey]

This should not be coming as a big surprise to the LCRW.

Indeed. They are putting on a facade of surprise.

This is about disobedience.

I applaud the Vatican for this action. :clapping: