What effect will the Vatican's reform of the LCWR have on religious in America?

[Ridgerunner]

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=666901&highlight=LCWR

As for the effect, it will tamp things down in the short term, but will do nothing to rid the underlying problems, merely the outward appearances. In the long term, this will pretty much take care of itself. The average age of communities which are affiliated with the LCWR is approximately 74. They are not getting vocations. In 10 - 15 years half of the communities from which the sisters with whom we have had problems come from will not even exist. This does sadden me in some ways, but it is also simple reality.

I am inclined to agree with you. Some of the orders have been so far gone for so long that I don’t really think anything will change them other than the passage of time. The wealthier ones (and some are wealthy) will turn into private left-wing foundations. The poorer ones will simply disappear without a trace.

It’s a known fact that the orders presently receiving new entrants are mostly new, faithful to the Church and many, at least, wear habits of some kind. The ministries of some of them are less “traditional” than we often think of them. Some focus on evangelization. Some focus on helping pregnant women avoid abortion. Some do focus on teaching, which we think of as more 'traditional". Most of their members are surprisingly young.

Some present orders are sort of “in between” the severely dissident politically-oriented radicals and the traditional orders.

My guess is that the Vatican’s reform efforts will have no significant effect on the worst orders, and aren’t needed by the more traditional orders, but will be seen as instructive by the “in between” orders.

 

[JReducation]

Your advice reminds me of Psalm 131, Brother. It has a calming and peaceful redirection back to our interior, removing the speculation of human curiosity that causes so many problems.

LORD, my heart is not proud;
nor are my eyes haughty.
I do not busy myself with great matters,
with things too sublime for me.
Rather, I have stilled my soul,
Like a weaned child to its mother,
weaned is my soul.
Israel, hope in the LORD,
now and forever.

I am inclined to agree with you. Some of the orders have been so far gone for so long that I don’t really think anything will change them other than the passage of time. The wealthier ones (and some are wealthy) will turn into private left-wing foundations. The poorer ones will simply disappear without a trace.

It’s a known fact that the orders presently receiving new entrants are mostly new, faithful to the Church and many, at least, wear habits of some kind. The ministries of some of them are less “traditional” than we often think of them. Some focus on evangelization. Some focus on helping pregnant women avoid abortion. Some do focus on teaching, which we think of as more 'traditional". Most of their members are surprisingly young.

Some present orders are sort of “in between” the severely dissident politically-oriented radicals and the traditional orders.

My guess is that the Vatican’s reform efforts will have no significant effect on the worst orders, and aren’t needed by the more traditional orders, but will be seen as instructive by the “in between” orders.

I don’t know about anyone else, but I have never had an encounter with any of these folks. Therefore, I don’t think about them. My concern is with dads in crisis pregnancies, the terminally ill, the disabled and the immigrant poor. When people speak about choice or about euthanasia and other things that hurt the voiceless, I respond to the principle without focusing on the congregation.

Whether these congregations survive or not, I don’t know. It’s not for me to know. These congregation were a gift from the Holy Spirit to the Church. It will be the Holy Spirit who decides if and when the Church no longer needs the gifts. Why think about it?

 

[commenter]

I have no idea what the outcome will be.

I’ll give you a piece of advice. I command my brothers, but I have no authority to command you. Please don’t take it as a command, but as good advice. Here’s what I gave my brothers to help them with this question and others.
*
"No man can be poor who hangs on to the worries of this world, even when those worries are inside the Church. Our holy father Francis was known to be of a joyous nature, precisely because he did not make the problems of the Church and of the world his own. Instead, he found ways to guide his brothers and the world and to turn their attention to the Crucified Christ through whom all things are brought to completion and through whom all pain, suffering and worry is healed by the triumph of the Cross.

Inspired by this thought, the brothers are commanded under holy obedience to focus only on the mystery of the Cross and the hope of the Resurrection. They are to avoid all thoughts about those things that do not involve them directly. They are to avoid all temptation to control the outcome of events. They are to refrain from opinions, questions, speculation and comments on anything that does not bring them closer to Christ, the Church, their brothers and the voiceless.

If a brother hears another brother operating beyond these parameters, let him in charity redirect his brother’s attention to the matter before him, to the Cross and to prayer. Nothing should come between a brother and the present moment. Nor should a brother ever forget that nothing is impossible for God."*

There is much wisdom and charity here, and I needed to read it. The Church has been damaged by uninformed laity who try to usurp the role of the bishop, or the Pope, or even God, attacking people in the Church who do bad things. OK. I am not a religious, and don’t know the details of vowed life. But as a husband and a parent I have been impacted by the LCWR and related groups, by its choosing to be manipulated by media and political forces hostile to Catholic laity. The LCWR isn’t solely to blame for the secularization of the USA, but it is part of a network that helped bring this about. Via the media, the LCWR and its allies have hurt the lay prolife movement, reduced support for traditional marriage, and been a factor for some laity leaving the Catholic Faith. So yes, this is the laity’s concern, and the lay response should be loving. One positive response is to support the other conference of religious, such as CMSWR, and encourage in your diocese vocations to religious orders that don’t support the LCWR. Affirm the bishops who have been assigned to review the LCWR; they are getting trashed by the media, so the silence of Catholic laity isn’t loving or positive. Pray, pray, and pray.

 

[Cojuanco]

Brother, I suspect it is because for better or worse they have left an indelible mark on the landscape of the United States, and people, both inside and outside the Church, are intimately concerned about the fate of the institutions they founded. Also perhaps a lot of people wish the so-called dissenting orders might return to the way they were in the 1950s (a fool’s errand and dangerous to the Church, I know, but people can be incredibly short-sighted when nostalgia comes into play).

 

[JReducation]

Brother, I suspect it is because for better or worse they have left an indelible mark on the landscape of the United States, and people, both inside and outside the Church, are intimately concerned about the fate of the institutions they founded. Also perhaps a lot of people wish the so-called dissenting orders might return to the way they were in the 1950s (a fool’s errand and dangerous to the Church, I know, but people can be incredibly short-sighted when nostalgia comes into play).

Good gravy NO. We certainly want religious communities to be faithful to the Truth. But we don’t want religious communities that were unfaithful to their founders, which was often the case in the 1950s. There were few communities that were what the founders wanted.

This in itself is not a great novelty. Every few centuries religious life undergoes a reform in order to return to the roots. We happen to be living during one of those periods. Religious life is undergoing another facelift, a much needed one.

 

[jwinch2]

I personally do not know anyone who wishes religious communities to return to a style of living which is not in keeping with what they were founded to do. There may be some of those people, but I personally believe that the majority of the time it is because they simply do not know that there was a discrepancy between what communities were doing prior to Vatican II and what they were originally founded to be. When this is explained to them, they almost always seem to get it.

What I do wish, and believe that the vast majority of others want as well, is simply for religious to be faithful to the deposit of Faith as taught by the Church. That’s it.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Brother, I suspect it is because for better or worse they have left an indelible mark on the landscape of the United States, and people, both inside and outside the Church, are intimately concerned about the fate of the institutions they founded. Also perhaps a lot of people wish the so-called dissenting orders might return to the way they were in the 1950s (a fool’s errand and dangerous to the Church, I know, but people can be incredibly short-sighted when nostalgia comes into play).

There are undoubtedly some who are motivated by nostalgia in their desire to have religious orders return to their practices and principles of long ago. But I don’t think that’s entirely the case, or perhaps even the case a good part of the time.

Take this order for example. www.sistersoflife.org. Now, read their site thoroughly, and you can’t say they are satisfying anyone’s need for nostalgia. Yes, they’re traditional. yes, they’re faithful to the teachings of the Church. Yes, they wear habits. But their particular mission wasn’t around in the 1950s. It’s something new, and very much needed, and quite demanding. I understand most of them are RNs, and they’re surprisingly young.

How very different they are from some of the orders now who intervene in political campaigns, bring lawsuits for liberal causes, or engage in voter fraud.

Personally, I am very favorable to the Sisters of Life and orders like that, and it’s not out of nostalgia, either. I favor them because they really are doing the kind of work and living the kinds of lives for which most religious orders were founded in the first place.

 

[Ridgerunner]

In case anybody thinks I’m touting the Sisters of Life, I’m frankly admitting that I am.

I was so impressed with them that I contribute regularly to their order. It’s not the only way to fight the evil of abortion, but it’s one of the ways. And it’s one of the few ways I can do it.

 

[jwinch2]

Just in case anyone is interested, I started a thread a while back related to positive stories on women religious.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=737023&highlight=positive+stories

 

[commenter]

Good gravy NO. We certainly want religious communities to be faithful to the Truth. But we don’t want religious communities that were unfaithful to their founders, which was often the case in the 1950s. There were few communities that were what the founders wanted.

This in itself is not a great novelty. Every few centuries religious life undergoes a reform in order to return to the roots. We happen to be living during one of those periods. Religious life is undergoing another facelift, a much needed one.

In my diocese, the religious communities at the time of founding were characterized by:

1. committment to the poor
2. committment to doctrine, evangelization to the Catholic Faith, and fidelity to the Magisterium
   When these same communities said they were going back to their roots, in the 1970s, they only referred to #1. They omitted #2, and have continued moving farther from that principle of their founders. There are some programs now showing committment to the poor, but not any more than what they were doing in the 1950s. If anything, they are now more inclined to embrace the establishment (media, politics) than they ever were in the 1950s.

 

[JReducation]

There are undoubtedly some who are motivated by nostalgia in their desire to have religious orders return to their practices and principles of long ago. But I don’t think that’s entirely the case, or perhaps even the case a good part of the time.

Take this order for example. www.sistersoflife.org. Now, read their site thoroughly, and you can’t say they are satisfying anyone’s need for nostalgia. Yes, they’re traditional. yes, they’re faithful to the teachings of the Church. Yes, they wear habits. But their particular mission wasn’t around in the 1950s. It’s something new, and very much needed, and quite demanding. I understand most of them are RNs, and they’re surprisingly young.

How very different they are from some of the orders now who intervene in political campaigns, bring lawsuits for liberal causes, or engage in voter fraud.

Personally, I am very favorable to the Sisters of Life and orders like that, and it’s not out of nostalgia, either. I favor them because they really are doing the kind of work and living the kinds of lives for which most religious orders were founded in the first place.

I love the Sisters of Life. When I was with the larger Franciscans, I looked at them very closely. They really inspired me to move out and found our community, Franciscans of Life. They’re far more advanced in the process toward becoming a pontifical institute than we are. In my community, I’m the only one who is in solemn vows, but that’s because I was in solemn vows when I founded the community. Everyone else is where the Sisters of Life were when they began.

However, one of the most important things that we learned from them and from the CFR was the importance of adopting the a new situation as is the proclamation of the Gospel of Life, while at the same time going back to the 13th century to the rule of 1221. What we find is that the early rule does not need to be changed. It works with today’s needs, because the rule describes how we live and what our priorities and values should be. It does not box us in to a specific apostolate. We can live the same way of life and hold the same values as the first generation of Franciscans while working in an area that the first generation would never dream about.

In my diocese, the religious communities at the time of founding were characterized by:

1. committment to the poor
2. committment to doctrine, evangelization to the Catholic Faith, and fidelity to the Magisterium
   When these same communities said they were going back to their roots, in the 1970s, they only referred to #1. They omitted #2, and have continued moving farther from that principle of their founders. There are some programs now showing committment to the poor, but not any more than what they were doing in the 1950s. If anything, they are now more inclined to embrace the establishment (media, politics) than they ever were in the 1950s.

This is precisely why we need the facelift. This happens every few centuries. Communities try to adapt to the needs that they perceive and sacrifice their charism. We saw this at the time that St. Bernard renewed monasticism, when Dominic and Francis renewed the Mendicants, when Teresa, John of the Cross and Ignatius renewed religious life after the Reformation, when the great founders renewed religious life after the French Revolution and now today. It’s a cycle.

 

[McCall1981]

I love the Sisters of Life. When I was with the larger Franciscans, I looked at them very closely. They really inspired me to move out and found our community, Franciscans of Life. They’re far more advanced in the process toward becoming a pontifical institute than we are. In my community, I’m the only one who is in solemn vows, but that’s because I was in solemn vows when I founded the community. Everyone else is where the Sisters of Life were when they began.

However, one of the most important things that we learned from them and from the CFR was the importance of adopting the a new situation as is the proclamation of the Gospel of Life, while at the same time going back to the 13th century to the rule of 1221. What we find is that the early rule does not need to be changed. It works with today’s needs, because the rule describes how we live and what our priorities and values should be. It does not box us in to a specific apostolate. We can live the same way of life and hold the same values as the first generation of Franciscans while working in an area that the first generation would never dream about.

This is precisely why we need the facelift. This happens every few centuries. Communities try to adapt to the needs that they perceive and sacrifice their charism. We saw this at the time that St. Bernard renewed monasticism, when Dominic and Francis renewed the Mendicants, when Teresa, John of the Cross and Ignatius renewed religious life after the Reformation, when the great founders renewed religious life after the French Revolution and now today. It’s a cycle.

Do you think all of the orders (Franciscans, Dominicans, Jesuits, etc) go through a renewal like this at the same time, like they are all on the same cycle, or do they each go through their own renewal at different times?

 

[JReducation]

Do you think all of the orders (Franciscans, Dominicans, Jesuits, etc) go through a renewal like this at the same time, like they are all on the same cycle, or do they each go through their own renewal at different times?

That’s an excellent question and a good topic for a doctoral dissertation on Church History. I’m not a Church historian, but from what I know about religious life, up to today, the renewal of religious life seems to be related to what is going on in the world around religious life. Whatever is going on around religious life, affects the whole indiscriminately. That’s been the case from Benedict to today. That’s about 1500 years.

To this day, the renewal of religious life has always involved the entire world of religious, not just one community, one house or one institute. Individual houses and communities have gone through renewals in between the major renewals.

In religious life, renewal is a strong sign of the Paschal Mystery. There is a lot of pain involved. Communities have to let go of much of what they have accepted as the status quo. Letting go is never easy. Imagine this. You enter a community at age 18. When you turn 45, someone says, “Guess what? The community that you entered and the one that the founder had in mind are not the same. We have to make some major changes.”

This is very painful. Some people have actually said, “I don’t want to be the kind of Franciscan that lived in the 13th century. I want to be the kind of Franciscan that I came to know in the 1950s.” These people have to make a choice. They either accept the change or they leave. Most of them leave. I use Franciscans, but this is true of every community that is in renewal.

When people depart from a community, it is painful for those who leave and for those who remain. Farewells are never easy, especially if you have lived as brothers or sisters for a long time. In addition, there is an unknown ahead of you. It is one thing to read about the Dominicans of the 13th century and quite another to live it. It sounds very romantic until you find that not everyone has a cell phone. No one has a car, because you now have to share a car with five people. You can’t go out to eat dinner with the laity who were nice enough to invite you to their home, because the community has things to do that you need to attend. There is a lot more.

These are just simple examples of the dying process. However, the Paschal Mystery does not stop at death. There is also the Resurrection.

What follows, once those who needed to leave do so and once those who needed to stay adjust, is a new life for the community. There is a certain joy in recovering your roots. My brothers and I have found that we love each other very much. I think that part of this is because we’re very much like the early Franciscans. We’re small enough to be very close. We’re not a corporation of 15,000. We suffer together when one is suffering. But there is a joy in this. Allow me to give an example.

I take a lot of medicine. Medicine is not free. We have no insurance. For me, it was a very beautiful experience when the brothers said, “Just buy the medication. We’ll find the money between all of us and if necessary, we’ll ask the secular brothers for help.” Then the secular brothers jumped on board and said, “That’s not a problem. Each of us can cover a portion.” This is new life. This love helps me to see the world through the eyes of the Risen Christ. The Risen Christ sees all things restored to their proper order. He sees things as they should be, as the Father wills them to be. He sees the action of the Holy Spirit. I, as dumb as I am, can also see the action of the Holy Spirit in this love. Christ is very present through my brothers and my brothers have faces and names. They’re not an anonymous part of a major organization of 15,000 men. This is the product of returning to the roots.

There is nothing wrong with being a religious community of 15,000. Please understand that I’m not knocking it. We have wonderful communities that are huge. Even those huge communities, as they reform, regroup into smaller cells. Some of the larger communities give birth to little communities and some just create smaller cells where the spirit and vision of the founder becomes more palpable.

Even in monasticism, where there is much more independence, there is the intimacy that Benedict and Basil tried to recover when they renewed monasticism. This intimacy takes a different form from that of the Mendicants. For the Mendicants, brotherhood is an essential part of their vocation. No brotherhood, not religious community. In monasticism, brotherhood is the product, not an end as it is with friars.

As history progresses, these products and ends can become obscured by what is happening around us. There will be a need to stop and sort things out every few hundred years. I think that it’s a universal renewal, because all religious communities live in the same historical moment.

 

[McCall1981]

That’s an excellent question and a good topic for a doctoral dissertation on Church History. I’m not a Church historian, but from what I know about religious life, up to today, the renewal of religious life seems to be related to what is going on in the world around religious life. Whatever is going on around religious life, affects the whole indiscriminately. That’s been the case from Benedict to today. That’s about 1500 years.

To this day, the renewal of religious life has always involved the entire world of religious, not just one community, one house or one institute. Individual houses and communities have gone through renewals in between the major renewals.

In religious life, renewal is a strong sign of the Paschal Mystery. There is a lot of pain involved. Communities have to let go of much of what they have accepted as the status quo. Letting go is never easy. Imagine this. You enter a community at age 18. When you turn 45, someone says, “Guess what? The community that you entered and the one that the founder had in mind are not the same. We have to make some major changes.”

This is very painful. Some people have actually said, “I don’t want to be the kind of Franciscan that lived in the 13th century. I want to be the kind of Franciscan that I came to know in the 1950s.” These people have to make a choice. They either accept the change or they leave. Most of them leave. I use Franciscans, but this is true of every community that is in renewal.

When people depart from a community, it is painful for those who leave and for those who remain. Farewells are never easy, especially if you have lived as brothers or sisters for a long time. In addition, there is an unknown ahead of you. It is one thing to read about the Dominicans of the 13th century and quite another to live it. It sounds very romantic until you find that not everyone has a cell phone. No one has a car, because you now have to share a car with five people. You can’t go out to eat dinner with the laity who were nice enough to invite you to their home, because the community has things to do that you need to attend. There is a lot more.

These are just simple examples of the dying process. However, the Paschal Mystery does not stop at death. There is also the Resurrection.

What follows, once those who needed to leave do so and once those who needed to stay adjust, is a new life for the community. There is a certain joy in recovering your roots. My brothers and I have found that we love each other very much. I think that part of this is because we’re very much like the early Franciscans. We’re small enough to be very close. We’re not a corporation of 15,000. We suffer together when one is suffering. But there is a joy in this. Allow me to give an example.

I take a lot of medicine. Medicine is not free. We have no insurance. For me, it was a very beautiful experience when the brothers said, “Just buy the medication. We’ll find the money between all of us and if necessary, we’ll ask the secular brothers for help.” Then the secular brothers jumped on board and said, “That’s not a problem. Each of us can cover a portion.” This is new life. This love helps me to see the world through the eyes of the Risen Christ. The Risen Christ sees all things restored to their proper order. He sees things as they should be, as the Father wills them to be. He sees the action of the Holy Spirit. I, as dumb as I am, can also see the action of the Holy Spirit in this love. Christ is very present through my brothers and my brothers have faces and names. They’re not an anonymous part of a major organization of 15,000 men. This is the product of returning to the roots.

There is nothing wrong with being a religious community of 15,000. Please understand that I’m not knocking it. We have wonderful communities that are huge. Even those huge communities, as they reform, regroup into smaller cells. Some of the larger communities give birth to little communities and some just create smaller cells where the spirit and vision of the founder becomes more palpable.

Even in monasticism, where there is much more independence, there is the intimacy that Benedict and Basil tried to recover when they renewed monasticism. This intimacy takes a different form from that of the Mendicants. For the Mendicants, brotherhood is an essential part of their vocation. No brotherhood, not religious community. In monasticism, brotherhood is the product, not an end as it is with friars.

As history progresses, these products and ends can become obscured by what is happening around us. There will be a need to stop and sort things out every few hundred years. I think that it’s a universal renewal, because all religious communities live in the same historical moment.

Wow, thanks for this great response