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

[commenter]

Quote:
“Can the Vatican create an organization to replace the LCWR? Can they replace it with the CMSWR?”

You might say the Vatican has already, in part, done this, by giving the CMSWR equal status, though they have not (yet) decertified the LCWR. I think if the Vatican decides to use the CMSWR as their exclusive liaison, the LCWR will continue their political activity, perhaps like NETWORK and similar groups. They will still get boosted by the media. I think some of their political stands that have been implicit up to now - on abortion or same sex marriage - will become explicit, once they become totally independent.

 

[McCall1981]

Quote:
“Can the Vatican create an organization to replace the LCWR? Can they replace it with the CMSWR?”

You might say the Vatican has already, in part, done this, by giving the CMSWR equal status, though they have not (yet) decertified the LCWR. I think if the Vatican decides to use the CMSWR as their exclusive liaison, the LCWR will continue their political activity, perhaps like NETWORK and similar groups. They will still get boosted by the media. I think some of their political stands that have been implicit up to now - on abortion or same sex marriage - will become explicit, once they become totally independent.

Interesting. If this happened, I wonder how it would play out? At first I think the LCWR would get a lot of media attention, but over time they’d fade away. I think the reason they get attention now is because they are voicing heterodox views while inside the Church. If they left, I would think they’d get less attention because someone voicing heterodox views outside the Church is less controversial.

 

[Mrs_Sally]

Interesting. If this happened, I wonder how it would play out? At first I think the LCWR would get a lot of media attention, but over time they’d fade away. I think the reason they get attention now is because they are voicing heterodox views while inside the Church. If they left, I would think they’d get less attention because someone voicing heterodox views outside the Church is less controversial.

The LCWR is made up of a representatives of the congregations. If the Vatican stopped working with the group, it would likely disband. The sisters themselves would be outside the church unless they chose to leave. I doubt that they would given that they have stuck with religious life for many years so far.

 

[McCall1981]

The LCWR is made up of a representatives of the congregations. If the Vatican stopped working with the group, it would likely disband. The sisters themselves would be outside the church unless they chose to leave. I doubt that they would given that they have stuck with religious life for many years so far.

After news first came of the reform I remember there was an announcement of how the LCWR would respond, and the media framed it like they might have left the Church. I wonder if that was ever a realistic possibility, or was just hype by the media?

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

The LCWR is made up of a representatives of the congregations. If the Vatican stopped working with the group, it would likely disband. The sisters themselves would be outside the church unless they chose to leave. I doubt that they would given that they have stuck with religious life for many years so far.

How would the sisters be outside the Church? They would still belong to their individual congregations. The LCWR is a group made up of the superiors/leaders, not the individual sisters.

I’m looking at the LCWR web page (lcwr.org/). Their president is from the Sisters of St. Francis in Wisconsin. If the LCWR no longer existed, she would stop being their president. She would still be a Sister of St. Francis with whatever responsibilities and ministries she has with them.

 

[JReducation]

That last paragraph interests me, given the PM I sent you about the Dominican who seems not to wear habit outside of Mass. He’s a phenomenal preacher, but is this allowed?

This is allowed, because the Rule of St. Augustine does not mandate that they wear the habit.

from an earlier post:
“The Vatican can replace the LCWR with another body that does the same thing.”

from the CMSWR website:

“The Council of Major Superiors of Women Religious (CMSWR) is a canonically approved organization founded in 1992, to promote religious life in the United States. Its statutes were definitively approved by the Vatican Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life on October 26, 1995.”

The CMSWR doesn’t route their work through the LCWR in their liaison with the Holy See, the bishops, and other entities. The leaders of some communities belong directly to CMSWR, and have nothing to do with the LCWR. The bishops and the Holy See can choose to increase the portion of their liaison effort with the other canonical body already in place, while still respecting the rights of the LCWR members.

The Vatican would have to close out the LCWR and ask all of the bishops and women religious to run their business with the Vatican through the CMSWR. Right now, that’s not the role of the CMSWR.

The LCWR is made up of a representatives of the congregations. If the Vatican stopped working with the group, it would likely disband. The sisters themselves would be outside the church unless they chose to leave. I doubt that they would given that they have stuck with religious life for many years so far.

The LCWR is not a religious community. It’s a conference. The sisters would continue to belong to their religious congregations.

How would the sisters be outside the Church? They would still belong to their individual congregations. The LCWR is a group made up of the superiors/leaders, not the individual sisters.

I’m looking at the LCWR web page (lcwr.org/). Their president is from the Sisters of St. Francis in Wisconsin. If the LCWR no longer existed, she would stop being their president. She would still be a Sister of St. Francis with whatever responsibilities and ministries she has with them.

This is correct.

 

[commenter]

Interesting. If this happened, I wonder how it would play out? At first I think the LCWR would get a lot of media attention, but over time they’d fade away. I think the reason they get attention now is because they are voicing heterodox views while inside the Church. If they left, I would think they’d get less attention because someone voicing heterodox views outside the Church is less controversial.

I agree. If the Church stated that the LCWR no longer has standing as an official Catholic organization, they would get less attention. At present, they get far more attention than other religious/political groups that have the same views. For instance, theologians who have been “decertified” by the Church, seem to have far less impact afterwards. If a college is now secularized, but still carries the Catholic label, it can do far more damage than a college that is accurately labelled as nonsectarian. That does not mean the college, or the LCWR, is all bad, or that we are judging the individuals in it.
Again, what has been lacking in the debate is a call for prayer about this; what Catholics should want is the spiritual welfare of the persons involved, and those who are impacted by them.

 

[Mrs_Sally]

How would the sisters be outside the Church? They would still belong to their individual congregations. The LCWR is a group made up of the superiors/leaders, not the individual sisters.

I’m looking at the LCWR web page (lcwr.org/). Their president is from the Sisters of St. Francis in Wisconsin. If the LCWR no longer existed, she would stop being their president. She would still be a Sister of St. Francis with whatever responsibilities and ministries she has with them.

Correct. There was a missing “not” in my previous post.

 

[PJM]

=McCall1981;10636571]What effect do you think the Vatican’s reform of the LCWR will have on women religious in the US? I mean this both for the short term during the reform itself, and in the longer term as the results of the reform play out.

THAT my friend is a great question

It will depend on God’s grace Offered and then recevived and rightfully applied.

PRIDE in many forms and deeply seeded SEEMS to be the issue to be overcome.

IF the reform is accepted as intented with GREAT HUMILITY; Much good can be expected. Both for the souls of those involved, and the souls they “touch.”

IF, and this seems to be at least a distinct possibility by some of them:

God’s offer of forgiveness is rejected; and prideful MEISM rules the day [and night]; then
its just SOS [same old stuff], but now rekindled and burning passionately.

This is an opportunity for US to pray much, so that what Gods makes possible; becomes the reality. Without great humility, don’t expect great results.

John.20 Verses 20 to 23 " When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained”

Matt. 5:14-20
""You are the light of the world.[WE ARE ALL CLALED TO BE] A city set on a hill cannot be hid. Nor do men light a lamp and put it under a bushel, but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven./COLOR] "Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them. For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. ***Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. ***[20] For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven" :byzsoc:

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

Correct. There was a missing “not” in my previous post.

Ah…that makes sense! Don’t you hate it when that happens – and even if you reread your post you don’t see the typo. Not that it ever happens to me…no…

 

[jwinch2]

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

Here is the original mega thread on this topic. Contained therein are presentations of the happenings in the 1960-70’s which led to some of the issues we are still seeing today. There is a ton of good information presented by the psychologists who were involved in the formation programs of some of these sisters, the historical issues which led to the decisions by the Holy See, etc.

Here is one good example of the type of information contained in the thread: ewtn.com/library/PRIESTS/COULSON.TXT

Anyone who is interested in this is highly encouraged to read through this thread and the links it contains.

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.

 

[JReducation]

I’m bailing out of this thread, because people don’t want to listen to those of us who are on the inside and have not gone back to look at previous posts by other people and links to other statements on this subject. There is no room for any of us in this thread.

The Church cannot just walk away from the LCWR and say that it’s no longer Catholic. The LCWR is a conference erected by the Vatican, chartered by the Vatican, and is a bridge between religious sisters, the Vatican and the local bishops. The male religious superiors have already told the CDF that they will not allow the CDF to violate the law, which means that the CDF cannot walk away from the LCWR. The same male conferences has reminded the CDF that it can only go so far. In order to go further, the CDF must convoke a council of bishops and religious superiors (male and female) and in that council the religious must have one vote more than the bishops. At that council and only at that council can certain legal steps be taken, including closing down the LCWR.

Abandoning it or declaring it not to be a Catholic organization is not prescribed, foreseen or allowed by the law within the Sacred Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life. The CDF only has jurisdiction over matters of faith, not over religious and conferences of religious. Therefore, it can only correct those issues that are in conflict with the faith.

This has been said on CAF any number of times in many different ways, not least, citing letters that have gone back and forth between the religious and the CDF. But posters do not read these things nor do they listen to religious, but proceed to suggest what is not possible as if it had not been addressed. It becomes an endless dialog, if no one is willing to accept that there are policies, procedures and limits that the CDF, the LCWR and the SCICLSAL must follow.

This a dialog that leads to no conclusion. It reminds me of my mother’s harping at my father for leaving the newspaper all over the table after 40 years of my father doing that and her adult children wondering when my mother was going to realize the facts. One would think that someone would realize that this was a futile use of time and words, but she didn’t. They’re in heaven and I’m sure that she’s still at it.

 

[McCall1981]

I’m bailing out of this thread, because people don’t want to listen to those of us who are on the inside and have not gone back to look at previous posts by other people and links to other statements on this subject. There is no room for any of us in this thread.

The Church cannot just walk away from the LCWR and say that it’s no longer Catholic. The LCWR is a conference erected by the Vatican, chartered by the Vatican, and is a bridge between religious sisters, the Vatican and the local bishops. The male religious superiors have already told the CDF that they will not allow the CDF to violate the law, which means that the CDF cannot walk away from the LCWR. The same male conferences has reminded the CDF that it can only go so far. In order to go further, the CDF must convoke a council of bishops and religious superiors (male and female) and in that council the religious must have one vote more than the bishops. At that council and only at that council can certain legal steps be taken, including closing down the LCWR.

Abandoning it or declaring it not to be a Catholic organization is not prescribed, foreseen or allowed by the law within the Sacred Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life. The CDF only has jurisdiction over matters of faith, not over religious and conferences of religious. Therefore, it can only correct those issues that are in conflict with the faith.

This has been said on CAF any number of times in many different ways, not least, citing letters that have gone back and forth between the religious and the CDF. But posters do not read these things nor do they listen to religious, but proceed to suggest what is not possible as if it had not been addressed. It becomes an endless dialog, if no one is willing to accept that there are policies, procedures and limits that the CDF, the LCWR and the SCICLSAL must follow.

This a dialog that leads to no conclusion. It reminds me of my mother’s harping at my father for leaving the newspaper all over the table after 40 years of my father doing that and her adult children wondering when my mother was going to realize the facts. One would think that someone would realize that this was a futile use of time and words, but she didn’t. They’re in heaven and I’m sure that she’s still at it.

Br. JR, I really appreciate that youve provided a lot of great info for this thread, about what the LCWR is and what the reform is. I hope that not too many people are under the mistaken impression that the Vatican can or would just drop the LCWR, I know Im not.

I know that the LCWR is a bridge organization between the sister’s congregations and the Vatican, that the reform only applies to the LCWR itself and not to the actual congegations of sisters, and that the CDF cant and wont “remove” the LCWR.

My question is intended to be, given that the LCWR is being reformed, what will the results of the reform be? Clearly the result will not be that the LCWR is somehow removed.

But clearly there will be some result, and Im curious about what people think that will be.

 

[PJM]

=McCall1981;10640126]What would “going back to the roots” consist of?

Do you think the reform will help bring this about?

The “roots” are: Who’s in charge? them or God?

As to the effects please look at my previous post on this string.

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

But clearly there will be some result, and Im curious about what people think that will be.

The question isn’t what PEOPLE think it will be, it’s what the Vatican thinks it will be.

You can look at the document on the USCCB web site: usccb.org/loader.cfm?csModule=security/getfile&pageid=55544

It says, in part:

The mandate of the Archbishop Delegate includes the following:

1. To revise LCWR Statutes to ensure greater clarity about the scope of the mission and responsibilities of this conference of major superiors. The revised Statutes will be submitted to the Holy See for approval by the CICLSAL.
2. To review LCWR plans and programs, including General Assemblies and publications, to ensure that the scope of the LCWR’s mission is fulfilled in accord with Church teachings and discipline. In particular:

• Systems Thinking Handbook will be withdrawn from circulation pending revision
• LCWR programs for (future) Superiors and Formators will be reformed
• Speakers/presenters at major programs will be subject to approval by Delegate

1. To create new LCWR programs for member Congregations for the development of initial and ongoing formation material that provides a deepened understanding of the Church’s doctrine of the faith.
2. To review and offer guidance in the application of liturgical norms and texts. For example:

• The Eucharist and the Liturgy of the Hours will have a place of priority in LCWR events and programs.

1. To review LCWR links with affiliated organizations, e.g. Network and Resource Center for Religious Life.

 

[PJM]

=DaddyGirl;10646409]What specific “reforms” are they gonna do?
Hard to say what the effect will be if we don’t know what changes they intend to make. Do you know? Has the Vatican specifically said?

.

That is:

Either yet undetermined

Or held secretly

BUT it MUST flow around HUMBLE and total Obedience to the Paiope and Magisteriums teachings. Amen

 

[edwest2]

Of course language living languages evolve. Which is why English is spoken in different ways in different parts of the world. I’m sorry to shoot down your theory but your friend did not encounter dialects what they encountered was accent. Because I can assure you there aren’t pockets of the UK still using Anglo-Saxon. As you point out English has borrowings from Norse, French, German, Sanskrit Et.Al. One interesting example is the American use of the word ‘fall’ and the British ‘Autumn’ Fall was quite coming in Tudor England which is when it was introduced into the American English lexicon while it fell into disuse in the UK in favour of Autumn. The language evolved in different was in different parts of the world. We don’t speak in the same way that contemporaries of Chaucer or Shakespeare did. Nor do we speak in the same way that people did in the 1950s

I still speak like those from the 1950s because, well, I’m from there.

Ed

 

[JReducation]

Br. JR, I really appreciate that youve provided a lot of great info for this thread, about what the LCWR is and what the reform is. I hope that not too many people are under the mistaken impression that the Vatican can or would just drop the LCWR, I know Im not.

I know that the LCWR is a bridge organization between the sister’s congregations and the Vatican, that the reform only applies to the LCWR itself and not to the actual congegations of sisters, and that the CDF cant and wont “remove” the LCWR.

My question is intended to be, given that the LCWR is being reformed, what will the results of the reform be? Clearly the result will not be that the LCWR is somehow removed.

But clearly there will be some result, and Im curious about what people think that will be.

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."*

 

[Sirach2]

*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. *

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.

 

[McCall1981]

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."*

Thanks for this