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

  • Thread starter Thread starter Corki
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
iloveangels said:
People are missing the point. And the hyperbole is astonishing.

This notification was released by the bishops but the authority for it is from the CDF in Rome. It is Rome’s business to manage the affairs of pontifically approved associations and it’s doing that.

This notice was about the LCWR, no more and no less. The report on the congregations themselves has not yet been made public.
Click to expand...
The LCWR is a leadership conference, so I think it’s fair to say that questions of leadership and authority are at the heart of the issue. The women who rise to power to lead their congregations are by definition the best and the brightest. Conflicts between such women and the Bishops are nothing new. What is different is that today women have other options besides the Church to lead in their community.

Since these women certainly believe they did nothing to merit the gravity of the mandate being imposed upon them it will be interesting to see how they respond to it. The fact that they look at this as “a moment of great import for religious life and the wider church.” means they are thinking of this as a defining moment for themselves in relation to the Church. It is really up to them to decide what to do.
 
bellasbane said:
The LCWR is a leadership conference, so I think it’s fair to say that questions of leadership and authority are at the heart of the issue. The women who rise to power to lead their congregations are by definition the best and the brightest.
Click to expand...
On the contrary, often they’re just among the youngest, a rather small pool of people. The average age of sisters in the US is quite high.
bellasbane said:
Conflicts between such women and the Bishops are nothing new. What is different is that today women have other options besides the Church to lead in their community.

Since these women certainly believe they did nothing to merit the gravity of the mandate being imposed upon them it will be interesting to see how they respond to it. The fact that they look at this as “a moment of great import for religious life and the wider church.” means they are thinking of this as a defining moment for themselves in relation to the Church. It is really up to them to decide what to do.
Click to expand...
It’s a long story getting to this point, and most people, including most Catholics, are running off at the mouth without knowing or understanding the long story. But there is some truth in the assertion that the LCWR is going to have to decide what to do, yes. As a conference it has some choices to make.
 
bellasbane said:
Since these women certainly believe they did nothing to merit the gravity of the mandate being imposed upon them it will be interesting to see how they respond to it. The fact that they look at this as “a moment of great import for religious life and the wider church.” means they are thinking of this as a defining moment for themselves in relation to the Church. It is really up to them to decide what to do.
Click to expand...
Yes. The big question will be of their obedience.

The sisters that are in congregations or orders (or some others, Br. JR could probably explain it better than I could) take vows of obedience. Like all Catholics, they also need to give full and willful consent to doctrines of the Church, including recognizing the authority of the Bishops as shepherds of the faithful.

It would be interesting to see how these sisters live the vows of obedience in their own community, because it’s probably a good indication of their consent to doctrines of the Church. Maybe some of the groups are “democracies”, but they’re under the patronage of the Pope or a local bishop. If you really want to get down and into the details, they’re under the ultimate authority of Jesus Christ (the Son of God); if they really have problems with the authority of men then they might be in the wrong religion.
 
bellasbane said:
The LCWR is a leadership conference, so I think it’s fair to say that questions of leadership and authority are at the heart of the issue. The women who rise to power to lead their congregations are by definition the best and the brightest. Conflicts between such women and the Bishops are nothing new. What is different is that today women have other options besides the Church to lead in their community.
Click to expand...
There is that old saying about how a fish rots from the head down. If leadership is not faithful to the Church, then its influence cannot fail to be destructive at lower levels.

Certainly women have options other than the Church for leading their community. And, if they dislike the Church, that’s exactly what they should do. But it is disingenuous for them to pretend to represent the Church when, in fact, they oppose it.

I agree with you. Those who do not wish to be faithful to the Church should seek positions in the secular world. Then they can really prove that they’re, as you say, “the best and the brightest”.
 
jwinch2 said:
Which you then used to portray as the message of the entire article, when the article was using that statement as something not to do.
Click to expand...
The article was full of hyperbole about the “radical feminist agenda” of the LCWR that runs roughshod over the good little sisters are only trying to do their duty and must labor under the poison of the LCWR, which is pervasive and potentially deadly for some in the Church.

hancaquam.blogspot.com/2012/04/lcwr-getting-to-truth-of-matter.html

I really don’t see how you distinguish that from the “Right’s narrative of Holy Mother Church Finally Punishes Naughty Daughters.” Maybe you could clarify it for me.
 
bellasbane said:
The article was full of hyperbole about the “radical feminist agenda” of the LCWR that runs roughshod over the good little sisters are only trying to do their duty and must labor under the poison of the LCWR, which is pervasive and potentially deadly for some in the Church.

hancaquam.blogspot.com/2012/04/lcwr-getting-to-truth-of-matter.html

I really don’t see how you distinguish that from the “Right’s narrative of Holy Mother Church Finally Punishes Naughty Daughters.” Maybe you could clarify it for me.
Click to expand...
I read the article that your link points to, and both points of view seem to be covered there. Unfortunately the truth is really neither of the two extremes, but as it usually is, somewhere in the middle. Again, I have to remark: Most people don’t really know the history of this set of phenomena and just overgeneralizing and spouting off at the mouth.
 
One of my Jewish bosses once commented on Church dissenters, “You should either obey the rules, or leave and form your own club.”
 
bellasbane said:
The article was full of hyperbole about the “radical feminist agenda” of the LCWR that runs roughshod over the good little sisters are only trying to do their duty and must labor under the poison of the LCWR, which is pervasive and potentially deadly for some in the Church.
Click to expand...
Why not give the next statements? He goes on to say that we need to pray for the members of the LCWR and that we should not lump them in with those who are vocally challenging Church teaching just because they are in the same organization or happen to not wear a habit. In addition, he goes out of his way to say that the vast majority of religious represented by LCWR are faithful women who are living their vows and states that the ones who are problematic are outliers who are not representative of consecrated women religious in America.

In addition, in some of those comments Fr. was quoting A) an article that he commented on which was linked to; and B) sisters he has interacted with during his time as a consecrated religious friar. Regarding his comments about statements he has heard from religious sisters. Are you suggesting he is a liar?
bellasbane said:
I really don’t see how you distinguish that from the “Right’s narrative of Holy Mother Church Finally Punishes Naughty Daughters.”
Click to expand...
I’m sure you don’t, which is why you took a statement that was suggested as representative of the wrong way to approach understanding this situation and used it to describe the intent of the entire article.

Here is the article he cited which, if you are looking to quibble, would probably be a better place to start.

patheos.com/blogs/godandthemachine/2012/04/first-reaction-from-the-lcwr/
 
DaddyGirl said:
Hey, forgive me if someone has already answered this question…but there are so many posts here, I can’t get through them all.

The Reuters article about this says that the report accuses the group of nuns of "promoting ‘certain radical feminist themes incompatible with the Catholic faith.’ "

Does anyone know specifically…what radical feminist themes these nuns are allegedly promoting? No article I’ve seen online so far describes the specifics.
Are they promoting The Pill? Sex out of marriage? Female priesthood?

And again, if it’s already spelled out here somewhere…lemme know and I’ll sift thru.

usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/20/11306372-catholic-nuns-group-stunned-by-vatican-scolding-for-radical-feminist-ideas?lite/
Click to expand...
LOL Are you looking for a cause?
 
DaddyGirl said:
Hey, forgive me if someone has already answered this question…but there are so many posts here, I can’t get through them all.

The Reuters article about this says that the report accuses the group of nuns of "promoting ‘certain radical feminist themes incompatible with the Catholic faith.’ "

Does anyone know specifically…what radical feminist themes these nuns are allegedly promoting? No article I’ve seen online so far describes the specifics.
Are they promoting The Pill? Sex out of marriage? Female priesthood?

And again, if it’s already spelled out here somewhere…lemme know and I’ll sift thru.

usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/20/11306372-catholic-nuns-group-stunned-by-vatican-scolding-for-radical-feminist-ideas?lite/
Click to expand...
See a general overview of the situation here: whispersintheloggia.blogspot.com/2012/04/for-us-nuns-roman-shake-up-lcwr-ordered.html and here: vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/homepage/the-vatican/detail/articolo/stati-uniti-united-states-estados-unidos-14506/

See an example of the normal sort of behavior that you asked about above here: ncan.us/2008/12/support-for-maryknoll-priest-rev-roy-bougeois.html. If you check the letter and those it was signed by, you will find a who’s who of the LCWR.

See an example of some of the really off the wall stuff the Vatican is so concerned about here: patheos.com/blogs/godandthemachine/2012/04/exhibit-a-for-explaining-the-lcwr-report/ Its a bit sensationalist, but the person is actually scheduled to speak at the LCWR conference so it isn’t as if they are making it up.

I hope that helps a bit.

Peace,
 
jwinch2 said:
See a general overview of the situation here: whispersintheloggia.blogspot.com/2012/04/for-us-nuns-roman-shake-up-lcwr-ordered.html and here: vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/homepage/the-vatican/detail/articolo/stati-uniti-united-states-estados-unidos-14506/

See an example of the normal sort of behavior that you asked about above here: ncan.us/2008/12/support-for-maryknoll-priest-rev-roy-bougeois.html. If you check the letter and those it was signed by, you will find a who’s who of the LCWR.

See an example of some of the really off the wall stuff the Vatican is so concerned about here: patheos.com/blogs/godandthemachine/2012/04/exhibit-a-for-explaining-the-lcwr-report/ Its a bit sensationalist, but the person is actually scheduled to speak at the LCWR conference so it isn’t as if they are making it up.

I hope that helps a bit.

Peace,
Click to expand...
Yes, the keynote speaker is really strange. Imagine Teilhard de Chardin’s weirdest book on steroids with a tin foil party hat and you pretty well have the idea. It’s very new age.

These are the kinds of speakers that get hired as keynote speakers for religious groups these days. She’s not a sister. She was probably picked up off an authors’ list or from a speaker’s bureau someplace. Perhaps some sisters read some of her flaky books and that’s how she got asked.
 
Ridgerunner said:
There is that old saying about how a fish rots from the head down. If leadership is not faithful to the Church, then its influence cannot fail to be destructive at lower levels.

Certainly women have options other than the Church for leading their community. And, if they dislike the Church, that’s exactly what they should do. But it is disingenuous for them to pretend to represent the Church when, in fact, they oppose it.

I agree with you. Those who do not wish to be faithful to the Church should seek positions in the secular world. Then they can really prove that they’re, as you say, “the best and the brightest”.
Click to expand...
I don’t see how seeking a position in the secular world makes you unfaithful to the Church. Must we all now take religious vows in order to be considered among the faithful? I don’t think an independent woman has to dislike the Church in order to realize the Hierarchy has decided there is no role of authority in it for her. That’s not the woman’s choice. The Bishops have always had a problem with how to deal with independent women. Mary Magdalene comes to mind…

If I read your first sentence correctly, you acknowledge that “leadership” and “the Church” are distinct things. The Magisterium is not the Church - it is only part of the Church. They are like the servants who wash the feet of the disciples. Right?

The biggest issue in the CDF Doctrinal Assessment is not that the LCWR is being unfaithful to the Church, but that it is being unfaithful to the Magisterium of the Bishops - or at least that it isn’t focusing on their priorities. It has its own priorities.

I think you go too far in your negative assumptions about these women, who have given much of themselves in order to serve others. They are the best and the brightest and the Church certainly needs them.
 
Weighing in with opinion…for what is worth here.
I think this is going to be formative more than it will be punitive for women religious. The conference was formed because Rome wanted it. Maybe the sisters will simply decide to disband the LCWR and form their own group or groups.
It’s getting rather ugly these days as the hierarchy continues to do things to show their control and power over us, regardless of who gets hurt…and it’s us, the Catholics, getting hurt by all this. If these actions coming out of Rome continue, the damage to unity will be significant. This kind of crusade is ugly and It will not end well.
 
iloveangels said:
Yes, the keynote speaker is really strange. Imagine Teilhard de Chardin’s weirdest book on steroids with a tin foil party hat and you pretty well have the idea.
Click to expand...
something like this?



Bonus points if you can name the character and movie…

😃
 
bellasbane said:
I don’t see how seeking a position in the secular world makes you unfaithful to the Church. Must we all now take religious vows in order to be considered among the faithful?..
Click to expand...
Wow, talk about misconstruing what someone has said!

He didn’t say that. Nobody said that but YOU.
 
curlycool89 said:
Yes. The big question will be of their obedience.

The sisters that are in congregations or orders (or some others, Br. JR could probably explain it better than I could) take vows of obedience. Like all Catholics, they also need to give full and willful consent to doctrines of the Church, including recognizing the authority of the Bishops as shepherds of the faithful.

It would be interesting to see how these sisters live the vows of obedience in their own community, because it’s probably a good indication of their consent to doctrines of the Church. Maybe some of the groups are “democracies”, but they’re under the patronage of the Pope or a local bishop. If you really want to get down and into the details, they’re under the ultimate authority of Jesus Christ (the Son of God); if they really have problems with the authority of men then they might be in the wrong religion.
Click to expand...
I don’t think a good Catholic should suggest to another Catholic that they are in the wrong religion. It would have been better if you had stopped after the second paragraph. The Spirit clearly wasn’t in that last one.
 
bellasbane said:
I don’t see how seeking a position in the secular world makes you unfaithful to the Church. Must we all now take religious vows in order to be considered among the faithful? I don’t think an independent woman has to dislike the Church in order to realize the Hierarchy has decided there is no role of authority in it for her. That’s not the woman’s choice. The Bishops have always had a problem with how to deal with independent women. Mary Magdalene comes to mind…

If I read your first sentence correctly, you acknowledge that “leadership” and “the Church” are distinct things. The Magisterium is not the Church - it is only part of the Church. They are like the servants who wash the feet of the disciples. Right?

The biggest issue in the CDF Doctrinal Assessment is not that the LCWR is being unfaithful to the Church, but that it is being unfaithful to the Magisterium of the Bishops - or at least that it isn’t focusing on their priorities. It has its own priorities.

I think you go too far in your negative assumptions about these women, who have given much of themselves in order to serve others. They are the best and the brightest and the Church certainly needs them.
Click to expand...
Bellasbane,
The notification came from the CDF. stop.
The CDF will be handling it. stop.
That’s all you know about it because that’s all any laypeople know about it. stop.

Easy does it.
 
jwinch2 said:
See an example of some of the really off the wall stuff the Vatican is so concerned about here: patheos.com/blogs/godandthemachine/2012/04/exhibit-a-for-explaining-the-lcwr-report/ Its a bit sensationalist, but the person is actually scheduled to speak at the LCWR conference so it isn’t as if they are making it up.
Click to expand...
:banghead::crying::banghead:

I … what … what was that? Things like this:
Although we may never know what really happened, we do know that the story told in the Gospels is that Jesus’ resurrection was a first demonstration of what I call the post-human universal person. We are told that he did not die. He made his transition, released his animal body, and reappeared in a new body at the next level of physicality to tell all of us that we would do what he did. The new person that he became had continuity of consciousness with his life as Jesus of Nazareth, an earthly life in which he had become fully human and fully divine. Jesus’ life stands as a model of the transition from Homo sapiens to Homo universalis.
Click to expand...
That’s Heresy. Out and out heresy. This is not something that is even on the edge of Christian theology, that is heretical.

Seriously, WTF. I’m sorry for the obscenity, but this is outrages. This is “I should be ripping my shirt” outrages because it’s blasphemous.
bellasbane said:
I don’t think a good Catholic should suggest to another Catholic that they are in the wrong religion. It would have been better if you had stopped after the second paragraph. The Spirit clearly wasn’t in that last one.
Click to expand...
Do you see anything that is wrong, or just stuff you personally disagree with?

Yes, I don’t want them to leave the Faith, but if you’re going to stay then LIVE it. Don’t call yourself Catholic without any intention of actually being Catholic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top