Francis On Religious Formation Which Is Really Formation For One And All

The LCWR can take real hope from Pope Francis' chat with their male counterparts

Vatican Radio had a piece about an article in Civilta Catollica, the flagship journal of the Jesuits, in which Fr Anthony Spadaro writes about the meeting between Pope Francis and the Congregations of men religious.  I found the piece very enlightening in terms of describing Pope Francis' thoughts, not just in regards to religious vocations and formation, but also with evangelization and clericalism. Francis urges his religious leaders to always keep the "People of God" in mind for all that they do and teach.  On a personal level, I found it wonderful because religious congregations are not the only places one has to put in place formation programs or keep the people of God in mind.  As a teaser, here's one of my favorite Francis quotes from the article:

"Formation is a work of art, not a police action.  We must form their hearts.  Otherwise we are creating little monsters. And then these little monsters mold the People of God.  This really gives me goosebumps".

One of the reasons I found that line both poignant and funny is because we have the same issues in training residential staff.  I don't know how many times I have stated "we are not in the business of policing behavior, we are in business of forming healthy attitudes".  Of course in my particular line of work, the 'police action' attitudes don't give me hypothetical goosebumps, they give me one real crisis after another.  In our version of formation, the idea of forming hearts, which is where all the good work comes from, always takes a back seat to forming minds pleasing to our liability insurance provider.  We have training after training designed to form that kind of thinking, but very little about the importance of forming hearts, of learning to act first from a sense of compassion rather than a need to control others.  It's easy to give some training in how to de escalate a particular situation.  The real trick is getting staff to understand why their attitudes or knee jerk responses triggered the escalation in the first place.

Here's another line that really struck me:

"We all make mistakes, and we all need to recognize our weaknesses.  A religious who recognizes himself as weak and a sinner does not negate the witness he is called to give, rather he reinforces it and this is good for everyone."

This is another mantra I use all the time in training, especially because we are supposed to be using the Recovery Model as our therapeutic paradigm.  I tell both staff and clients repeatedly that you have to know your own weaknesses and be realistic about them, otherwise you get in the way of your own recovery or your own ability to 'heal' anyone.  If a person 'punches a button' or causes you to react with strong emotion, that's not first and foremost about the other person, that is all about you and your issues.  This is why extending a little mercy and compassion to ourselves is really a critical skill to develop. If we can't do that, we are not predisposed to extend the same to people, who by the very fact they are in our care, shows they probably need a whole lot more mercy and compassion than staff does.  

 

Extending compassion to another is really hard to do just from educating one's thinking because emotions come first.  When your emotions are triggering a strong need to give 'so and so' a swift kick in the behind, training doesn't compensate all that well.  When I can freely admit 'so and so's' drunken state is going to trigger all my anger about my dead alcoholic brother and I have legitimate reasons for that anger, I am much more likely not to make 'so and so' the brunt of all that pent up anger about my dead brother.  Or as I also say a lot, honest self appraisal about one's weaknesses does not lower one's perfection quotient, it raises it in the minds of others.  This is the same point Francis is making when he states admitting one is a sinner does not negate witness, it reinforces it.

And finally, one last favorite Francis quote:

"I am convinced of one thing: The great changes in history were realized when REALITY was seen not from the center but from the periphery."

This idea of change coming from the seeing the reality from the periphery is not just about institutions and cultures, but also about interpersonal relationships.  One of my clients, irritated with me for some reason, put that idea this way:  "I do not live in the center of your personal universe."  That was a wake up call to say the least.  Or as one of my co staff couldn't refrain from saying:  "Whoa, you just dropped your perfection quotient by a good standard deviation."  It was hard not to fire him on the spot, which I didn't (and couldn't) but I restored some of my perfection quotient by actually laughing out loud at being hoisted on my own petard.  Laughter is still the best medicine.

AB Sartain Continue To Stonewall The LCWR About Just What It Is The Vatican Is Upset About

 

Franciscan Sister Ilia Delio gave a superb speech with a lot of food for thought at the annual LCWR convention.  Not so much AB Sartain

The LCWR had their annual meeting this week in Orlando, Florida.  I turns out it might have been the best place to hold their meeting as it was attended by the Vatican appointed overseer Archbishop Sartain of Seattle and he did his best to come across as friendly as any Disney character.  Unfortunately, sources cited by the National Catholic Reporter indicate his responses to some very pertinent questions were more like Mickey Mouse.  It seems no matter how often LCWR leadership ask him for details about their alleged doctrinal indiscretions he has no specifics.  The following is an extract from an article by NCR's Joshua McElwee which hi lites some of the responses of LCWR members to Sartain's talk.

 

 

.....Before Sartain’s talk Thursday, LCWR leaders hosted an earlier three-hour closed-door meeting with their members. According to several sisters, that meeting was the first opportunity of this year’s assembly for LCWR members to ask the organization’s three presidents how discussions with Sartain over the mandate have been going since April 2012.

 

Meetings between Sartain and LCWR leaders in the 18 months since publishing of the mandate have taken place outside public scrutiny, and neither Sartain nor the sisters have publicly detailed the number or content of their meetings.

 

According to knowledgable sources, LCWR members were told Thursday that their leadership had met with Sartain four times over the past year: Once following last year’s LCWR assembly in St. Louis, once in November in Baltimore during the annual U.S. bishops’ meeting, once in May during the group’s annual visit to Rome, and once more this summer.

 

Each time, the LCWR leaders told their members Thursday, Sartain did not detail the Vatican’s specific concerns with LCWR. 

 

In their first meeting last August, Sartain also reportedly said he had not been sufficiently educated on the renewal of religious life that followed the Second Vatican Council (1962-65). Those renewal efforts, which lasted for decades, are widely viewed by women religious as momentous achievements.

 

In their closed session with members Thursday, the LCWR board also shared a report of its May meeting in Rome with members of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Several sisters said they were told that the LCWR’s response to the doctrinal assessment had contained “deficiencies,” but these were not spelled out. 

 

When meeting in the closed-door session with Sartain Thursday, several sisters reportedly asked the archbishop to spell out the alleged deficiencies, but he did not do so.

 

I'm seriously at a loss as to how the LCWR can respond to allegations which are not spelled out.  What are they supposed to do...punt?  The fact this has been going on for 18 months is pretty insulting.  I almost feel sorry for 'brother' Sartain.  He too is being used, but at least in his case, this idiot song and dance might result in further advancement.  For the LCWR it has to be engendering further anger and confusion.  How do they follow the 'magisterium' with any kind of integrity when said magisterium refuses to act like adults or treat the LCWR as adults.  This is the kind of thing defective parents pull on kids because the kids are totally dependent on them and they can get away with it.  Members of the LCWR are not dependent on the CDF or a certain subset of American cardinals and I don't honestly don't know why the LCWR keeps putting up with this kind of treatment.  It's way past time for the CDF to get specific, but I think this CDF won't get specific because in reality this entire fiasco was a case of Cardinal Levada abusing his office for the sake of certain other American Cardinals---the ones who are in the back pocket of the Republican party.  That very party that lost on Obamacare because of the LCWR influenced Catholic Health Care Association.  Which would mean this whole thing is not about doctrine, it's about politics.  Which would mean that Sartain is stuck with a bogus investigation that can't possibly have any kind of face saving exit strategy.  So he gives advice like this:

 

"Sartain told the sisters their role “is to be thinking with the church and fidelity to the magisterium of the church."

 

And answers direct questions like this:

 

"According to one member, common themes in the questions asked of Sartain by LCWR members Thursday included:

• Frustration of the sisters’ congregations on the slowness of receiving information regarding how Sartain’s role at LCWR would continue;

• A feeling that the reputation of U.S. sisters had been unfairly tarnished;

• Sharp disagreement with allegations by Vatican officials that LCWR does not adequately communicate with bishops in Rome.

 

To the last point, Sartain reportedly said that Vatican officials “going forward hope to have better communication with LCWR.” (An interesting statement since the Vatican has been the one who consistently refused to meet with LCWR leadership in Rome.)

 

And then he gave this suggestion:

Instead of choosing only one speaker to address its members, Sartain suggested they select respondents as well, including at least one who would put in a positive light the official teachings of the church. (As if members of the LCWR don't know Catholic teachings.)

 

We may never get an official statement from either AB Sartain or the LCWR since both sides agreed to maintain silence on what transpired during Sartain's talk and the subsequent question and answer session.  The LCWR has stated they are thinking of releasing a statement at the end of the weekend, but I doubt it will say a whole lot.  Both sides seem willing to keep up this shadow boxing that gets no where. It may be that both sides are waiting for Pope Francis to make a decision on who will lead the CDF, and it could be it's current head, AB Mueller, is not precisely enthusiastic about pursuing this investigation if he's not going to have his job in a few months.  But whatever the case, one hopes this refusal to deal with the alleged issues does not keep up for the next three and a half years because no one will save face in that case.  Rather both sides will look less than adult.  

 

I can't help but wonder what Cardinal Braz de Aviz thinks of this whole charade given he has publicly stated he did not like the fact his dicastery was kept totally out the CDF loop. I can't imagine he's impressed with how this is playing out because the LCWR has loads of influence on religious women in the global church.  I suspect if it was up to him the whole thing would have done and over with a long time ago.  Unfortunately for everyone it's not up to him.

 

 

 

Pope Franics Is Not All That Evolved On Issues Of Sex And Gender

 

Thought I'd put up a bit of a plug for a truly deep woman theologian.  It's sort of a post card to Pope Francis from the margins of Catholic theology.

There certainly has been a lot of gigabytes used up on Pope Francis' impromptu interview on his way back to Rome.  Not surprisingly the comments concerning Msgr Ricca and the 'gay lobby' have so far generated the most commentary.  Personally I think that will change as more people take in some of the other statements Francis made, such as his comments on women's place in the Church. I think it was because I red flagged on these comments that I did not view Francis' statements on gays as particularly noteworthy.  To me all he seemed to be saying was that celibate gay priests should not be marginalized just because they are gay or have made mistakes (sins not crimes).  This may signal less pressure on gay priests to leave and a more open stance towards gay seminarians per se, but not a whole lot more than that.  I certainly did not see where these comments will have much effect at all on GLBT laity one way or the other.  I don't see where they can precisely because Pope Francis seems blind to the Church's rejection of any notion of a positive contribution for the feminine. To this point his stated idea of the contribution of the feminine is wrapped up in Marian theology and childbearing and housekeeping and he has so far admitted to being influenced only by his mother and some 'grandmothers'.  The fact he stated we need to work on a deeper theology of women was mind blowing to me.  Women have been doing feminine theology for well over half a century--the very half century he's been a priest.  Which makes me wonder just who he envisions doing this 'deeper theology of women', and I'm afraid he means male clerics--preferably Jesuit.

None of what I've just written contradicts the fact I still see Pope Francis as very close to if not at Stage 6 spirituality.  Even the most spiritually advanced folks I have met have had their blind spots and cultural filters.  It's the nature of the human game. I can see Francis making real change in Church governance and reprioritizing the instituional mission while never even conceiving of changing the teachings on sex and gender.  Given all that, I found this article in SpiegelOnLine with conservative gay theologian David Berger most in line with my own response. Berger was a prominent lay theologian at Rome's Pontifical Academy of St. Thomas Aquinas who came out of the closet in 2010 in frustration over the hypocrisy of Rome's gay clergy.  I've re posted this interview in full:

Gay Comments: Pope Francis Not as Liberal as He Seems

Annette Langer - SpiegelOnLine - 7/31/13

Pope Francis has sparked enthusiasm with his call for greater tolerance toward gays. But it's too soon to celebrate, says theologian David Berger. The pope's warning not to engage in gay propaganda puts him on par with homophobes like Russian President Vladimir Putin, he contends.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: On the flight from Brazil to Europe, Pope Francis was unexpectedly candid. "If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?" he said, causing many commentators to rejoice. Was this really such a big sensation?

Berger: It is incredibly naïve to liken it to a dam bursting. What are gays or lesbians to think when someone tells them: I don't want you to be discriminated against, but you are not allowed to live out your "tendency" anyway? According to doctrine, the homosexual act is still a sin. Here lies the central problem and the reason I feel further marginalized as a Catholic.

  SPIEGEL ONLINE: Nevertheless, Francis has explicitly opposed the exclusion of gays. Has he been urged by his advisors to do this or is a genuine concern of his?

Berger: I don't believe that it was a PR move. But he also didn't say anything revolutionary. The notion that gays shouldn't be discriminated against is already in the catechism. But when Francis says in the same breath that gays should please not advertise their sexual orientation, he puts himself in a category with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who supports laws against "homosexual propaganda." 
(No Pope Francis is not another homophobic Putin. This may be a perfect example of the conservative bent to see things a little too black and white.)
 
SPIEGEL ONLINE: So this wasn't a call for greater openness of the Church?

Berger: I would like to see more openness. But there would have to be fundamental doctrinal revisions for that -- and I don't see that happening. Take Francis' categoric rejection of the ordination of women. "This door is closed," he said. This shows that when it comes to liberality, the pope is committed to the old gender roles. That's why I don't think he will be able to stop the ranks of priests from shrinking dramatically. (Yes, this Pope is definitely committed to the older gender roles.  Not surprising since it is precisely the older gender roles which prop up all the theology about the hierarchy in the Church he leads.)

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Is there really a so-called gay lobby in the Vatican?

Berger: There are loose networks that maintain connections in order to have sex without being discovered. But there is no organized group that advocates gay rights and wants to change the Church's doctrine. During my time in Rome, I rather experienced the opposite. Most gay priests are very pious, well-behaved people --organizing an uprising couldn't be further from their minds.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Defensive personalities who can be blackmailed because of their sexual orientation?

Berger: Sure, it's always about power. It is common knowledge in the Catholic Church that supervisors put pressure on gay priests in order to exploit them for their own interests. (And that some less scrupulous people will use the threat of exposure as gay to intimidate all priests--gay or straight.  This must have been especially effective in the Benedict papacy.)

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Since Bergoglio became pope, Italian gay activists say their relationship with the Church has already improved.

Berger: Francis's remarks may well bring about improvement in the predominantly Catholic countries. But in Germany we are having this discussion on a different level. As a gay man in Italy, you are satisfied just to get the crumbs that fall from the table of the lord. There, gentle discrimination is already a step forward. It's completely different in Berlin or in Cologne: We have no need to eat the crumbs. Either we sit at the table or we will not take part in the dinner. (I think this is very true and that Pope Francis is going to be somewhat blind sided by this difference.  And not just over the gay issue, but also over the divorced/remarried issue.)

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Francis says that any form of lobbying is harmful, making reference to the Freemasons and other political forces in the Vatican. Where does the pope stand theologically?

Berger: While John Paul II and Benedict XVI could be gauged, that's not possible with Francis. His theology is rather a kind of folk Catholicism of Latin American origin. Much of what is currently fascinating believers is really the Catholic version of the rites of popular evangelical sects. For example, when he asks people at his discretion to bless him before he does it himself, he is acting out a blessing rite of the Pentecostals. (Exactly, and this is one reason I think Pope Francis will elevate the Catholic Charismatic movement to new heights--it's the Catholic version of Pentecostal and Evangelical protestantism.)

SPIEGEL ONLINE: You get the feeling that the new pope expresses himself without much precision and sometimes contradictorily, which leads to misunderstandings.

Berger: Yes, that's right. Benedict XVI spoke as he would have written. Almost everything he said was well thought out in every detail. Francis's statements often contradict each other. So he first said that atheists are devils, only to say shortly later that they are just as good as Christians. Then it was up to his spokesman to correct the statements and put them into perspective accordingly. From an intellectual perspective, the election of Francis is a fiasco for the Catholic Church. But the general public is presumably already won over by his charisma. (That's probably a little strong, but then Berger seems to be another of those conservative gay men who think Pope Benedict's theology was the cat's meow.)

  SPIEGEL ONLINE: What about the celibacy rules under Francis?

Berger: There is currently a lot of movement on this, which is also supported by conservative forces. But from a pedagogical standpoint, nothing will really change. The prohibition of sex remains the most important factor of the Church's power. (That's certainly true in it's need to control the faith of individuals. It's proven ineffective in the Church's attempt to control the politics of any 21st century democracy.)

*******************************************


Pope Francis' trip to Brazil has to be judged a success for his nascent papacy.  It was sort of a no brainer.  It might have been a bit different if WYD had been held in say Austria or Ireland.  It seemed that as the week progressed Francis unveiled more and more of his thinking and his blue print for the Church.  For me, his most important speech was the one he gave to the organizing committee of CELAM.  It was his longest and most detailed speech.  He did not deviate very much from it's text.  I kept this speech in mind as I read through the transcript of his news conference on the plane back to Rome.  Maybe that's why I didn't find his gay comments to be particularly liberating.

Where as Francis has a well developed spirituality when it comes to the mission of the Christian individual and how the Church should support that mission, that outreach to the poor and marginalized he repeatedly delineates, he has a very traditional and not so developed view of personal morality and internal Church organization.  In these latter two cases he is not going to change any traditional view of sexuality or gender definition.  To do so is to remove the actual foundational rock of the institutional clerical church.  That foundational rock is not Peter, it's the fact Peter was male. If one were to really look at someone other than Jesus as the foundational rock of the Church, logic would dictate it was Mary.  In the case of the incarnated Jesus, the hen came before the egg.  Unfortunately, while Pope Francis can state that Mary is more important to the Church than any of the Apostles, that importance will never be ascribed to women in the same way the maleness of Jesus and the Apostles has been weaved into our theology of the priesthood and the over all primacy of men in the general scheme of things.  This maleness is so overwhelming it has even allowed an all male power structure to clothe it's institutional face as female...like a boat or something.   Every time some priest or pope uses the term "Holy Mother' Church I want to scream:  "No, No, No, it's neither Holy nor feminine!  It's corrupt and utterly masculine!"  

Unfortunately, Pope Francis has spent his entire adult life in this exclusively male culture.  He's lived and breathed it, and climbed it's rocky slopes until he's reached it's pinnacle. I doubt he's really had much time to seriously question it's underlying patriarchal assumptions.  Until that happens there can be no 'deep theology of women' coming from Rome or anywhere else in the official Catholic world.  The LCWR has seen the truth of the that fact.  So have specific female theologians like Margaret Farley and Elizabeth Johnson.  

There's a part of me that hopes Pope Francis is experiencing a little cognitive dissonance over the Church's official positions on women and gays as he takes in the views from the top of the pinnacle.  I would hope he looks down the slope he climbed and discerns that he crawled over lots of marginalized folks to get to the top.  I would hope that might be part of why he can forgive a gay priest his youthful indiscretions and now say 'who am I to judge'---at least not judge gay priests who are genuinely seeking God.  They are after all, his brother priests.  

As for women, well according to Francis, JPII had the final say on that. Brotherly solidarity, or papal solidarity in this case, still trumps cognitive dissonance, but that dissonance is there in his speeches.  He keeps calling for more feminine input, ever for a deeper theology of women, and he's placed women on his commissions. Eventually he may see that these kinds of band aids will not cover the wound patriarchy has inflicted on the Church's soul, nor solve his cognitive dissonance problem.  In the meantime the right wing can breathe easy on the fronts of Catholic sexual morality and gender hierarchy.  Straight male thinking still rules.

Cardinal Dolan's 'Dirty Freddy' Story Was No Joke

 

No dirty hands can pass through the doors of St Patrick's Cathedral on Cardinal Dolans' watch.  Well, unless they belong to OD bishops.

The following is an excerpt of an article written by Joseph Amodeo from Huffington Post about a small demonstration--10 people--they attempted to conduct at St Patrick's Cathedral.  It was in response to Cardinal Dolan's 'dirty Freddy' blog post from the previous week.  I wrote about this blog post myself.  The response from the Archdiocese was completely over the top.  It was all about fear, not dirty hands and not dirty gays.  I'm quite sure in a future blog post, Cardinal Dolan will tell us he had nothing to do with it.

Cardinal Dolan Denies Catholics Entry at Cathedral Because of Dirty Hands

Jospeph Amodeo - Huffington Post - 5/5/2013
 "Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks, receives; and the one who seeks, finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened" (Matthew 7:7-8).

Today, myself and others knocked at the door of St. Patrick's Cathedral, but the door was not opened, rather it was slammed in our faces. As I begin to write this article, I'm cognizant of the raw emotions that I feel deep inside my heart. It's a feeling that I'm unfamiliar with, because until today, I have never been denied a seat at Christ's table. In fact, today marks the first day that I have ever felt disowned, abandoned, and lost.

Earlier today, a group of Catholics including myself gathered on the corner of East 46th Street and Fifth Avenue in Manhattan. We gathered for a simple purpose, to dirty our hands as we prepared to attend Mass at St. Patrick's Cathedral. We were soiling our hands as a silent response to Cardinal Dolan's column last week in which he suggested that LGBT people were welcome in the church so long as they washed their hands. As we began to rub our hands together with pieces of ash, our hands took on the look and feel of the effort that has defined our work to receive an equal seat at the table of Christ in the Catholic Church. Those participating were not only LGBT Catholics, but also allies and, perhaps most importantly, parents of LGBT children. We gathered not in protest, but as a silent witness.

It is what transpired in the moments after soiling our hands that I have trouble understanding and placing in the context of the Christian experience. At around 9:30am, the ten of us gathered were greeted by four police cars, eight uniformed officers, a police captain, and a detective from the Police Commissioner's LGBT liaison unit. The detective informed us that the Cathedral would prohibit us to enter because of our dirty hands. It was at that moment that I realized the power of fear. The Archdiocese of New York was responding out of fear to a peaceful and silent presence at Mass. Even in light of this, we decided that we would walk solemnly from our gathering spot to the Cathedral with hopes that we might be welcomed.
As we reached St. Patrick's Cathedral, we were approached by Kevin Donohue, who identified himself as being in charge of operations for the cathedral. Sadly, Mr. Donohue's tone was both cold and scolding. What astounded me most was when he said that we could enter the cathedral so long as we washed our hands first. Even now, writing those words I find myself struggling to understand their meaning, while coming to terms with their exclusionary nature.......

********************************************

It took 10 of New York's finest to respond to this 'threat' from 10 of Cardinal Dolan's sheep?  Are you kidding me?  Over dirty hands?  Or maybe the real message is no one gets to poke fun at Cardinal Dolan's expense and protecting his dignity necessitates 10 of New York's finest including a precinct Captain.  If I had any doubts that Cardinal Dolan was a walking, talking, joking, smiling, bundle of personal insecurity, I don't any longer.  He strikes back like any other bundle of insecurity we usually call a bully.  Dirty Freddy indeed.

I feel for Joseph Amodeo.  From the rest of his post it is obvious he was nurtured in a very different form of Catholicism from one that Cardinal Dolan represents.  It does hurt when that other form, the one with all power, strikes out from it's black and white view of 'us vs them'.  The US Church seems especially plagued with black and white bullies in the Episcopal ranks.  Just ask the LCWR.  All Catholics need do to be received by this bunch of bishop bullies is admit they are apostates and can't lead themselves, wash their hands, or completely disempower themselves is some symbolic fashion to gain admittance to the table.  Wash their hands, bow their heads, and I assume brown our noses while we're at it.

In the meantime I have another question.  Why is it that Opus Dei Bishops like Kansas City's Finn and Newark's Meyer's are never disciplined when they egregiously violate not only the Dallas Charter, but secular law?  Why don't they have to wash their figuratively dirty hands?  Why isn't Cardinal Dolan demanding these men wash their dirty hands?  I can only come to the conclusion that at his childhood table the dirty Freddies may have had to wash their hands, but that rule didn't apply to dirty priests.  There is no other conclusion to draw.

My Cardinal Hero Speaks Up And I Say WOW!

Cardinal Braz de Aviz during his question and answer session for the gathering of global women religious superiors.  Photo credit:  NCR/Robyn J Haas

I have had an instant connection with Cardinal Braz de Aviz since I first read his personal story a few years ago.  I have been following his career with more than a little interest.  My intuition tells me this man holds key cards to the future of Catholicism.  The following article was just posted on the National Catholic Reporter and details his interaction with the International Union of Superiors General.

Vatican religious prefect: 'I was left out of LCWR finding'

Rome - Joshua McElwee - NCR - 5/5/2013
The controversial Vatican decision last year to place the main representative group of U.S. Catholic sisters under the control of bishops was made without consultation or knowledge of the Vatican office that normally deals with matters of religious life, the office’s leader said Sunday.

That lack of discussion over whether to sharply criticize the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR), said Cardinal João Braz de Aviz, caused him “much pain.”

“We have to change this way of doing things,” said Braz de Aviz, head of the Vatican’s Congregation for Religious.

“We have to improve these relationships,” he continued, referring to the April 2012 order regarding LCWR from the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith -- approved by Pope Benedict XVI -- that ordered the U.S. sisters’ group to revise.
“Cardinals can’t be mistrustful of each other,” Braz de Aviz said. “This is not the way the church should function.”

Braz de Aviz, who has led the Vatican’s Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life since 2011, made the comments Sunday during an open dialogue session with some 800 leaders of sisters’ communities at the triennial assembly of the International Union of Superiors General.
Answering questions from the sister leaders for over an hour and a half, Braz de Aviz spoke openly, referring several times to tensions between sisters and bishops on church authority, questions of obedience, and the future of religious life. (Answering direct questions for an hour and a half is mind boggling in itself.)

At one point the cardinal even called for wide-ranging review of structures of church power.
“We are in a moment of needing to review and revision some things,” Braz de Aviz said. “Obedience and authority must be renewed, re-visioned.”
“Authority that commands, kills,” he continued. “Obedience that becomes a copy of what the other person says, infantilizes.” (Yes, yes, yes!)

Braz de Aviz also told the sister leaders that “women’s leadership needs to grow a lot in the church,” referring to a remark made by Pope Paul VI during a session of the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) -- where the late pope asked the council fathers: “Where’s the other 50 percent of humanity that isn’t here?”
The Vatican mandate regarding LCWR, which was released in April 2012, appoints Seattle Archbishop Peter Sartain as the group’s “archbishop delegate.” It gives him final authority over its workings, and requires the group to revise its programs and statutes.

LCWR, which traces its roots to the 1950s, represents about 80 percent of the some 57,000 U.S. sisters.
Braz de Aviz spoke Sunday in Italian with his words being simultaneously translated into five other languages.

He said that his office -- which is tasked with overseeing the work an estimated 1.5 million sisters, brothers, and priests around the world in religious orders -- first learned of the move against the U.S. sisters’ group in a meeting with the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith after the formal report on the matter had been completed.

At that meeting, Braz de Aviz said, he told Cardinal William Levada, an American who has since retired as head of the doctrinal congregation, that the matter should have been discussed between the Vatican offices.
“We will obey what the Holy Father wants and what will be decided through you,” Braz de Aviz told the sisters he had said to Levada. “But we must say that this material which should be discussed together has not been discussed together.”

“I obeyed,” Braz de Aviz continued telling the sisters. “But I had so much pain within me.”
He also said it was the first time he was discussing the lack of consultation publicly, saying previously he "didn't have the courage to speak." (Not many did have the courage to speak during the last two pontificates.  More than a little infantilizing was the order of the day--even, and maybe especially, amongst senior curial officials.)

Speaking at a press conference following his talk, Braz de Aviz said that while his office “always obeys” the pope, “the problem very often is what kind of news goes to the Holy Father.”

Saying that different Vatican offices will sometimes give the pope varying viewpoints on situations like the LCWR matter, Braz de Aviz said “there’s a sort of like ‘Who is going to win?’”

“This struggle of who is going to win is not good, he continued. “But Peter and Paul also had problems. The answer is: ‘the Holy Spirit’ will win.”

LCWR’s status with the Vatican has been the subject of much discussion at the global sisters’ meeting. Franciscan Sr. Florence Deacon, LCWR’s president, told the assembly in a speech Saturday that the situation with the group indicated that “serious misunderstandings” exist between Vatican officials and Catholic sisters. (If readers haven't read the article linked in this paragraph, it's well worth your time.)

Asked during his dialogue with the sisters if it would be possible to have a meeting between LCWR and Pope Francis to discuss the matter, Braz de Aviz responded: “I think so.”
“But I know the pain is very big,” he continued, repeating: “Very big.”

Several former leaders of LCWR expressed pain and disappointment weeks ago when a Vatican press release said Pope Francis "reaffirmed" the doctrinal congregation's move.
“I don’t think Pope Francis would be a stranger to you,” Braz de Aviz told the sisters Sunday. However, the cardinal said, the pope “has confirmed the doctrinal review, he wants that to go forward.”

Braz de Aviz also responded to a question regarding a separate investigation of U.S. Catholic sisters launched by his Vatican congregation under his predecessor, Cardinal Franc Rode.
That investigation, known as an apostolic visitation, examined individual orders of U.S. Catholic sisters and resulted in a detailed report that was quietly submitted to Rome in January 2012.

That report, Braz de Aviz said, “has been sent to the pope, it is up to him to see if he will make it public.”
Earlier Sunday, Braz de Aviz had told the sister leaders during his homily at Mass with them that they are “co-essential” with the church’s bishops and the two groups must “walk together” in their leadership.
Referring to consecrated life as a “charismatic dimension” of the church, the cardinal told the sister leaders: “Today we need to rediscover that in the church there are two dimensions that are both co-essential, equally essential: The hierarchical dimension and the charismatic dimension.”
 (This sentence is a definite departure from the ecclesial understanding of the previous two popes.)

“We need to walk together, following, listening to the Holy Spirit -- men and women together,” he said during the homily.
Reflecting on Sunday’s reading from the Acts of the Apostles, which recounts the apostles’ decision to not require circumcision for Christians, Braz de Aviz said the account indicates the church has to discern when it is in a “new moment.”

“This is something we always have to be doing in the church, to discern constantly in order to move forward,” he said. “This also gives us the opportunity today, it seems to me, to understand the important question in our life as consecrated persons.”

During his dialogue session with the sister leaders, Braz de Aviz spoke again about men and women in the church working together, referring to the Genesis account that “God created them, man and woman. God created them in the image and likeness of God.”
That account, the cardinal said, emphasizes two things: “Man and woman are not God; they are creatures” and “man, without woman, is not humanity; and vice-versa.”

Part of the struggles between men and women in church leadership, said Braz de Aviz, stem from to “reconstruct our relationships” with one another. “Our relationships,” he said, “are sick, profoundly sick.” (Two thousand years of imbalance will produce a profoundly sick relationship.)

Regarding the advancement of women into church leadership positions, Braz de Aviz said “we can take a lot of steps in this direction” to create “a church more maternal” and not only paternal.
“The two aspects together would be much more balanced, much more human,” he said. “We must not be afraid of this.”

During his homily earlier Sunday, Braz de Aviz also revealed how Pope Francis had chosen the new second-in-command for his Vatican congregation, Franciscan Fr. Jose Rodriguez Carballo.
Rodriguez, formerly the minister general of the Orders of Friars Minor, was announced as the secretary for the Congregation for Religious April 6.

Pope Francis, Braz de Aviz said, asked him when making the decision: “Who do you want as your secretary? Give me three names.”
“So I gave him three names,” Braz de Aviz told the sister leaders. “But [the pope] said, ‘Of the three, which is the one you want?’ I said this one, Carballo. [The pope] said, ‘Good, fine.’ And he gave us Jose Carballo.”

“It’s a wonderful, simple way of doing things: I trust you, I trust Carballo, so that’s it,” Braz de Aviz said. “He doesn’t complicate it.”

***********************************************

I have to say Cardinal Braz de Aviz is such a ray of hope in an otherwise still dismal Vatican scene.  The LCWR can't help but feel a little better after this exchange with Cardinal Braz de Aviz.  I know I do--especially after having just written about a bishop of a totally different stripe.

Holy Wisdom Monastery Off Limits For Diocese of Madison Wi. Priests and Religious

Holy Wisdom Monastery was finished in 2010 and was awarded the U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design platinum award as the most eco friendly new construction in the US.  Of course, caring about the Earth is one the charisms of the Benedictine Women of Madison--amongst other concerns.

 My favorite bishop, Robert Morlino,  is back up to his favorite thing.  After threatening a parish with interdict I wondered when he would get around to Holy Wisdom Monastery which is now infamous for inspiring the words 'going beyond Jesus'.  Those are the words that all trads who think the LCWR are a bunch of pagan New Age priestesses will use with regularity to dis the LCWR.  The words come from the paper Sr Lauri Brinks presented to the LCWR back in 2007.  The very paper for which the Congregation for Doctrine and Faith took serious umbrage and in fact, directly mentioned in it's 'assessment'.  Given all of this, I am truly shocked Bishop Morlino took so long to inform his diocesan priests that Holy Wisdom was off limits.  The following is from the Wisconsin State Journal.

In the Spirit: Holy Wisdom Monastery now off-limits to Catholic priests

Bishop Robert Morlino is continuing to put more distance between the Madison Catholic Diocese and Holy Wisdom Monastery, a former Catholic monastery on the outskirts of Madison that is now a non-Catholic ecumenical retreat center.

In the latest development, Morlino is now prohibiting priests in the diocese from “attendance or participation at all events held at Holy Wisdom Monastery and all events sponsored or co-sponsored by Holy Wisdom Monastery or the Benedictine Women of Madison,” according to a March 7 letter to priests leaked to the State Journal.

A February visit to the monastery by Sister Simone Campbell, an outspoken, progressive Catholic nun, appeared to be the final straw for Morlino. (I bet it was the final straw.  Sr Campbell happens to be the head of NETWORK, a social justice lobby which itself was mentioned by name in the CDF assessment.)

The monastery, in the town of Westport on the northwest side of Lake Mendota, once was a Catholic high school for girls run by Benedictine nuns. After the school closed in 1966, the nuns turned the site into an ecumenical retreat center, offering a place of hospitality to a wide range of people and groups.

In 2000, the monastic Catholic sisters at the site welcomed a Protestant woman to live with them, a move that led them to seek independence from the Catholic Church. The Vatican approved their request in 2006. The monastery is now managed by the Benedictine Women of Madison, an ecumenical community led by Sister Mary David Walgenbach, who is Catholic. (It is a community of exactly three consecrated women.)

Morlino’s action highlights a longstanding beef some Catholics, especially those who are more tradition-minded, have with the monastery. The monastery’s worship services, they say, retain so many elements of a Mass that unsuspecting Catholics could be duped into thinking the services are valid representations of Catholic teaching. This is especially worrisome, they say, because the worship services diverge from church doctrine in profound ways, such as allowing women to preach and embracing the relationships of gay couples. (Well, if these poor unsuspecting Catholics were duped, it wouldn't be a sin anyway and if these Catholics think women are allowed to preach, they can't be good upstanding Catholics and deserve to be duped by some hybrid ecumenical service.  LOL)

“Holy Wisdom Monastery is perhaps best known among local Catholics for substantive rejection of the Catholic faith, so I would think priests or sisters should know they are not sending a good message if they attend events there,” said Elizabeth Durack of Madison, who attends the Cathedral Parish in Downtown Madison and has been vocal in encouraging “faithful Catholics” not to attend activities at the monastery.
The monastery’s worship services, while attended by people from many Christian backgrounds, have become particularly popular among liberal Catholics and those displeased with Morlino. (How utterly unsurprising.)

Morlino, in his letter to priests, said it was his duty “to protect the integrity and unity of the faith.” There “is a grave potential for scandal and confusion among the faithful, owing to Holy Wisdom Monastery’s status as a former Catholic monastery,” he wrote.

Diocesan spokesman Brent King said no single incident or priest precipitated the bishop’s decree; however, King said, publicity surrounding Campbell’s Feb. 14 appearance at the monastery “brought more attention to a Catholic giving an address at a former Catholic monastery” and “added to the ongoing confusion.” (Probably has nothing to do with the fact Sr Campbell has a higher media profile than Bishop Morlino.)

Campbell led the “Nuns on the Bus” campaign last year in opposition to Janesville Congressman Paul Ryan’s federal budget proposal, which she viewed as detrimental to the country’s social safety net. Her February appearance at the monastery was sponsored by the Interfaith Coalition for Worker Justice of South Central Wisconsin. (Also probably has nothing to do with the fact Morlino gave cover to Ryan's budget, against the statements of the USCCB, while the Nuns on the Bus did the exact opposite.)

Among those at the event was the Rev. Stephen Umhoefer, pastor of Nativity of Mary Catholic Church in Janesville, who gave the benediction and spoke warmly of Campbell’s work. His parish is part of the Madison diocese, and he is a diocesan priest. He declined comment.

Walgenbach also declined to comment. In the past, she and others at the monastery have said they do not consider themselves less Catholic because of their ecumenism. “The Catholic spirituality is bigger than the Roman Catholic Church,” Walgenbach told me last year.

Read more: http://host.madison.com/lifestyles/faith-and-values/religion/in-the-spirit-holy-wisdom-monastery-now-off-limits-to/article_a451b181-1eab-5657-98d5-8ae5989a3e94.html#ixzz2SQmsg3UQ


****************************************

When reading the above article I couldn't help but remember a comment of Pope Francis from his Holy Thursday homily:
 
"Those who do not go out of themselves, instead of being mediators, gradually become intermediaries, managers. We know the difference: the intermediary, the manager ... doesn't put his own skin and his own heart on the line, he never hears a warm, heartfelt word of thanks," he said.

Bishop Morlino doesn't quite fit the above description because he does go out of his way to placate orthodox Catholics.  In doing so he doesn't need to become an intermediary or a mediator because operating from one end of the Catholic spectrum negates him even having to mediate anything coming from the Vatican.  All he needs to reference is in his head and his head is full of Canon Law and the Catechism.  In this particular case of Holy Wisdom Monastery, there isn't much question the Benedictines of Madison are outside or 'beyond' the catechism and the Vatican itself freed them from Canon Law.  I'm just surprised it took an appearance by Sr Simone Campbell for Bishop Morlino to finally give the word about Holy Wisdom Monastery, but then that would be two strikes against the CDF assessment.  Two strikes and they are out.

I can't help but wonder why it is OK for Pope Francis to conduct services in a detention center but not OK for Madison priests and religious to attend any events at Holy Wisdom Monastery.  I bet I might even find instances in the Madison Diocese where Roman Catholics share service space with other denominations. This kind of thing happens everywhere anymore and no one gets scandalously confused.  Ecumenical services happen in their hundreds on a daily basis, and even Bishop Morlino has no problem with mixing with protestants during political prayer breakfasts and what not.  Of course, I'm not sure those ecumenical political things actually include any Democrats or other kinds of progressive Catholics, but I'm prepared to be wrong.  Which leads me to believe this latest edict is really about LCWR nuns--x LCWR or not-- and their ecumenical services and their politics.  On that, I'm willing to bet I'm not wrong.

When Insanity Is Taught As Reality

I have to blame my daughter for getting me started on this particular insanity--again.  But it's nice to know poor  Mario will never find his princess presiding in a cathedral--ever.  I can keep my search strictly to castles.

This has been a chaotic week for me and so I've fallen behind with blogs I cherish reading.  This morning I was able to catch up somewhat and found a brilliant piece by Bill Lyndsey over on Bilgrimage.  In it Bill is pondering the events at the funeral he recently attended for his uncle.  He wonders why churches let women talk before the services, astute brilliant caring women, but not during services where the ownership of a phallus trumps the intelligence of any female.  I wonder that myself, because I think it's the underlying elephant in the room when it comes to the CDF and the LCWR.  The following is an excerpt from Bill's post:

Something about this seems not quite right to me. Something about this seems screamingly wrong to me, and what's wrong about it all seemed to me to be in stark relief at my uncle's funeral. Women whose moral insights are far sharper than the conventional moral insights of preacher men who haven't had to think much about the complexities of making the gospel message they deliver critically pertinent to the world in which they live are permitted no say at all once the preaching and the praying begins, with the invocations of Father God and the songs to the Father in Heaven who sent His Son to save us all from sin.

Half the church sits in silence while the other half claims to be God. What struck me very strongly at my uncle's funeral is not merely how wrong--how insane--this arrangement and the theological system undergirding it are.

What struck me is also how much damage this arrangement (which is how most cultures in the world do business, so that patriarchal religion is merely aping the culture at large with its ideology of male entitlement and female subordination) damages us. How it damages the world in which we live. How it damages our religious institutions to shut out the interesting, accomplished, morally astute voices of women while letting the voices of less interesting, less accomplished, less morally astute men posture as God speaking to the rest of us who sit in meek submission and silence receiving God's words from God's phallic emissaries.

**************************************************

The gender issue is not going to go away.  Argumentation which leads with 'that's the way we've always done it' is not going to persuade in cultures in which 'the way we've always done it' have gone the way of the Dodo bird. More and more people are waking up to the fact that relegating the thoughts of educated intelligent women secondary to possession of a penis is truly, as Bill writes, insane.  Women's 'genius' is not limited to family and pregnancy.  No matter how many times women are told by men that this is their genius,  this constant repetition will not make it true.  This mantra also has the negative impact of minimizing the contributions of men to family life and lets men off the hook when it comes to taking responsibility for their children while giving secular legal systems a free reign to curtail male rights to interact with their own children.  It's promoted a situation in which too many men can pay for them but not play with them.

In Catholicism, the other situation I've found somewhat insane, is promoting celibate childless men as the experts on families and family life.  When one's sole experience of family is strictly from the child end of things, it shouldn't be surprising that an authoritarian paternal mode is the default method of interaction.  Actual parenthood involves many more paradigms than using reflexive authority to make your point and influence behavior.  Anyone who has raised teenagers is well aware of this fact, and the older one's children become, the more listening and the ability to dialogue become more and more prominent.  A parent reaches the stage where the relationship becomes far more about equals than parent child.  Unless it involves grandchildren.  Then, as my own mother informed me, grandparents get to enjoy and spoil the grand children without the problems of raising them.  The actual parents are not allowed to voice any opposition to this arrangement.  This resulted in driving back to Nevada from the ranch with a seven year old on a sugar high with a car full of toys informing me I was 'really mean and not nice like Grandma' because I wouldn't stop at every tourist trap for seven hundred and fifty miles to check out the toys.  But I digress.

There was one time when the celibate childless men allowed married lay people with children to have a voice.  That was back during the papal commission on birth control.  That lay voice was an eye opening experience for the vast majority of the clergy on that commission.  They voted to allow for artificial birth control because they heard from thousands of Catholic men and women that family life was not like Ozzie and Harriet, father did not always know best, and that Mr Ed had better advice than Fr Ed.  Pope Paul VI opted to reinforce the authority of childless celibate popes and the results of that decision are seen in generations of empty pews and fewer and fewer vocations.  We have now reached the point that young women are less inclined to participate in religion than young men.  That's a first and that is a damning sign for the future.  Unless Pope Francis can work some sort of gender miracle with in the Church, his predecessor will have gotten precisely what he wanted, a much smaller remnant church in the West with almost all vocations coming from Africa.  This will last only as long as women bring up the rear in access to educational and economic opportunities in Africa.

I'm well aware that the conservative Catholic will say it was birth control itself that caused all these problems for the Church.  Fewer children equals fewer vocations they will say and birth control  most definitely raises the 'it's all about me' quotient.  I've found that interesting in that it implies vocations are directly dependent, not on God, but on women having many children.  The historical idea seems to be that God calls some of the surplus children to religious vocations.  There is of course, another truth. God wouldn't have to rely on the surplus children if Catholicism didn't insist on a completely celibate male clergy.  God could rely on volunteers from all of His children which seems to be the message from the Pentecostal and Evangelical movement. If all Catholics could participate in the sacramental life of the Church, including leading the liturgy, we would have more than enough sacramental leaders and no gender issue.

Pope Francis is certainly familiar with the explosion in Pentecostal and Evangelical churches in Latin America.  He's also familiar with the popularity of Christian Base Communities in Catholic Latin America, a movement which was severely curtailed by his two predecessors precisely because Benedict and JPII felt these lay led communities diluted the theology of the celibate male priesthood.  Gender is one elephant in the Catholic livingroom, but the other is the celibate male priesthood itself.  Is Catholicism defined by it's desire to follow the teachings of Jesus or by it's uniquely celibate male priesthood?  Pope Francis appears to me to believe that for him the Church is both/and.  Unfortunately as far as women are concerned this is not really a both/and statement.  It's an 'I am/you are not' statement and that is not what Paul tells us Jesus taught. 

Things Are Changing And They Won't Stay The Same

This Photo from the NY Daily News demonstrates cell phone photography at Benedict's and Francis' papal elections.  This photo strikes me as potentially prophetic about how much lay participation each will have engendered.

Here's a couple of stories that have the rad trads going this Sunday morning.  The Sunday Times article is behind a pay wall and I have been unable to find a free copy.  NCR has just begun their annual donation drive so that link will begin with a video appeal.
 

Pope’s strongman blasts old guard aside

The pontiff is to give more women top jobs and break the grip of Italian cardinals, his key aide tells John Follain in Vatican City

 John Follain - The Sunday TimesUK - 4/21/2013
POPE FRANCIS plans to appoint lay women to top jobs in the Vatican and to dilute the power of Italian cardinals in a radical shake-up of the Catholic Church’s government following a series of scandals.
In a move branded as “revolutionary” by Vatican watchers, the Pope last weekend appointed eight cardinals to advise him on the governance and reform of the Curia, the church’s bureaucracy which has been tainted by controversies over child sex abuse by priests, leaks of papal files and allegations of corruption.
In an interview with The Sunday Times, Cardinal Oscar Andres Rodriguez Maradiaga of Honduras, whom Francis named to head the panel and who is now seen as a “power behind the papal throne”, predicted a difficult fight ahead for the Argentine pontiff.


Another Vatican voice backs civil unions for same-sex couples

John Allen - National Catholic Reporter - 4/21/2013
Another veteran Vatican figure has signaled openness to civil recognition of same-sex unions, in the wake of similar comments in early February from the Vatican’s top official on the family. It’s a position also once reportedly seen with favor by the future pope while he was still Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio in Buenos Aires, Argentina.
The latest expression of support for civil recognition as an alternative to gay marriage comes from Archbishop Piero Marini, who served for 18 years as Pope John Paul II’s liturgical Master of Ceremonies.

“There are many couples that suffer because their civil rights aren’t recognized,” Marini said.

************************************************

This is going to be one interesting papacy.  I have to agree with Cardinal Rodriguez Maradiaga, Pope Francis may have some hard sailing ahead.  John Allen remarks later in his article that the comments of Archbishop Marini and the earlier comments of Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, President of the Pontifical Council for the Family appear to be undercutting French and US Bishops.  I would agree, and that's because both archbishops framed their statements as a matter of civil rights and the French and US bishops have consistently stated in one form or another that gays have no rights to a legalized form of partnership.  I'm sure the same right wing argument will be leveled against women holding meaningful positions in the hierarchy--women have no rights to any leadership position in the Roman Catholic Church which would make male clerics subordinate to them.  Rough sailing ahead indeed.

I don't know where all this will eventually finish.  I don't think Pope Francis does either which is why hope and trust are recurring themes for him.  His multiple references to the Holy Spirit at large in the Church is another indication to me that he is willing to tip a few dominoes without having to know how many will then go down.  I don't know if that's a John XXIII kind of Pope or something new altogether.  I do know it takes a lot of faith and a lot of courage to make major decisions, even with the best of information, not knowing precisely how it will all come out.  I think that's called leadership.

I have no doubt Francis knows his main opposition will come from the right and it will come hard, strong, and not particularly Christ like.  He experienced that himself over the civil union question in Argentina.  This was the only issue he lost as president of the Argentine Bishops Conference. I will keep that in mind when it seems he is keeping progressives on something of a roller coaster ride.  

I also think Francis is a very strategic pope.  If the Rodriguez Maradiaga interview turns out to be correct, last weeks affirmation concerning the investigation of the LCWR makes some sense.  If Francis intends to appoint lay women to high positions in the curia he gave the right wing a sop.  Since lay women includes all sisters and nuns I will be curious to see how many religious women are included in these appointments. Personally,  I would really hope one of them is Leslie Anne Knight.  I have reason for my hope.

Just to review, Leslie Anne Knight was the president of Caritas Internationalis until 2011 when she was refused the necessary nihil obstat to run for another four year term.  This nihil obstat was under the purview of the Secretary of State's Office and not to grant her this Vatican seal of approval was a decision of Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone.  The Cardinal who led the Board of Directors for Caritas and was sandbagged by this decision,  taken completely behind his back,  was none other than Cardinal Rodriguez Maradiaga.  The following is taken from the Tablet's coverage:

"Cardinal Rodríguez wrote to all directors of the 165-member international confederation on 5 February to inform them of the Vatican’s decision. The letter, which was seen by The Tablet, notes that Secretariat of State officials met a CI delegation on that same day and gave only a verbal account of why the Vatican refused to approve Dr Knight’s candidacy. The cardinal does not mention those reasons in his letter, but does say that the CI bureau, in an extraordinary meeting, “expressed their incomprehension at the reasons provided” and “reaffirmed their positive view of Lesley-Anne Knight’s work for Caritas and the Church”.

Anyway, I will be very interested in Pope Francis' appointments because there's a new dealer at the table and he is not going to use the old stacked deck.  Amen.

Pope Francis Concurs With EPBXVI: The LCWR Must Have Male Coaches

 

Pope Francis will continue to rule with aid of 8 elder men in red and the LCWR will remain in the CDF dog house.  Oh well, I didn't expect change in either of these areas.

Yesterday I wrote about my angst concerning Pope Francis and today it was confirmed.  Under Francis nothing will change for the LCWR.  They will continue to be under the direction of three male coaches because Francis believes the CDF was correct in it's assessment--the LCWR was not playing the Catholic game by the rules. 


From the Vatican website: 

 Today the Superiors of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith met with the Presidency of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR) in the United States of America. Most Rev. J. Peter Sartain, Archbishop of Seattle and the Holy See’s Delegate for the Doctrinal Assessment of the LCWR, also participated in the meeting.

As this was his first opportunity to meet with the Presidency of the LCWR, the Prefect of the Congregation, Most Rev. Gerhard Ludwig Müller, expressed his gratitude for the great contribution of women Religious to the Church in the United States as seen particularly in the many schools, hospitals, and institutions of support for the poor which have been founded and staffed by Religious over the years.

The Prefect then highlighted the teaching of the Second Vatican Council regarding the important mission of Religious to promote a vision of ecclesial communion founded on faith in Jesus Christ and the teachings of the Church as faithfully taught through the ages under the guidance of the Magisterium (Cf. Lumen gentium, nn. 43-47). He also emphasized that a Conference of Major Superiors, such as the LCWR, exists in order to promote common efforts among its member Institutes as well as cooperation with the local Conference of Bishops and with individual Bishops. For this reason, such Conferences are constituted by and remain under the direction of the Holy See (Cf. Code of Canon Law, cann. 708-709).

Finally, Archbishop Müller informed the Presidency that he had recently discussed the Doctrinal Assessment with Pope Francis, who reaffirmed the findings of the Assessment and the program of reform for this Conference of Major Superiors.

It is the sincere desire of the Holy See that this meeting may help to promote the integral witness of women Religious, based on a firm foundation of faith and Christian love, so as to preserve and strengthen it for the enrichment of the Church and society for generations to come.

The LCWR has released a statement, which confirms the above and concluded:

The conversation was open and frank. We pray that these conversations may bear fruit for the good of the Church.

**************************************************

This confirms some of my thinking from yesterday. It's not so much that the LCWR is a group of women leaders, it's that they have an authority to their witness in direct competition to the authority which has been severely eroded in our male leadership. This authority is not seen as appropriately complementary.  It if for this reason I dismiss the complaints about a few sisters engaging in acts and speculation which cross doctrinal boundaries.  At bottom it isn't about those few sisters, it's about the real authority carried in witness of the LCWR member communities.  Even Mueller has to admit the face of the Catholic Church in the US is a product of the historic and continuing efforts of these congregations.

In tandem with this authority of witness, Francis also spoke yesterday on careerism in the clergy.  He made the point that one must live their witness. One's walk must match their talk and that all Christians must root out the idols that prevent them from emulating the teachings of Jesus.  Personally I think Roman Catholicism should root out the idol of male entitlement which precludes the clergy from truly understanding women are capable of being much more than spiritually dependent children or fertility gardens for boys bound for the priesthood. This kind of 'rooting out' is not going to happen under Francis and never was going to happen. He will encourage his clergy to live more like the sisters, but he will never encourage the sisters to share rule with the clergy.  So while the culture moves further and further away from women being dependent on men, Catholicism will not.  It will keep it's women sacramentally and spiritually dependent on ordained men.  It will keep it's gender definitions rooted in only the second creation story in Genesis and it's sexual morality defined by acts and not relationships.  It will become less and less relevant as a cultural insitution, even if Francis is capable of making a dent in clerical careerism.  In the end though, if the relationship between men and women does not change to reflect a true equality, all the reform in the world in the exclusively male clerical structures will be futile and ephemeral.  The collective consciousness of humanity is moving away from patriarchy and hierarchy and making equal space for the feminine impulse towards creativity and mutual consensus.  

Am I disappointed in Francis?  Not really.  Before this Conclave I had very little hope that underlying gender issues would ever be on the table.  Too much of Catholic theology is wrapped up in unexamined male entitlement.  As Mary Hunt states it:  If God is male, males must be gods.  The idea that God has no gender never computes.  The idea voiced by St Paul in Galatians that--There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus--has evolved to the point we no longer make distinctions between Jews and others and we no longer approve of slavery, but 2000 years later we still haven't gotten the last part.  We still have huge distinctions in gender expectations and Catholicism still insists women are spiritual dependents rather than active agents in their own right.

I can easily believe the LCWR leadership when they write that their conversation was open and frank. I suspect that kind of conversation about women will continue all through the papacy of Francis and most likely beyond him.  For me, I will be very happy if all he manages to do is close the Vatican Bank and institute meaningful collegiality because I suspect any change in the place of women is not coming from the top.  It will come welling up through the bottom.  Decentralization of Vatican authority can only help that bottom up change.  So while the men still insist on their rightful place as coaches to the ladies, I do see a future in which this changes.  And of course, this explains my observation from yesterday about why so many men hold coaching positions in women's highschool and college athletics--it sends a very real message about traditional male authority over women.

Things Are Changing Very Fast In The Worlds Of Gender And Marriage And This Will Be The Challenge Frances May Not Be Ready To Acknowledge In His Reforms

 

Forty years ago I played on this same basketball court to a total crowd of maybe twenty.

I have to admit I am truly stunned with the accelerating change in attitudes about gay marriage.  This might be a real-time example of the snowball phenomenon in which a small ball starts rolling down hill and becomes the catalyst for an avalanche. Or to put it differently, get enough effort behind an idea and once the collective consciousness reaches a certain point or critical mass,  a chain reaction starts, change occurs, and there is no going back.  There will be no going back on gay marriage.

I also have believed for a very long time that the real threat in gay marriage is it's implied gender equality, and that is a legacy of the women's movement.  I look back on the women's movement and stand stupefied by the changes in some areas that have occurred just in my lifetime.  Back in the early 70's I played basketball on the first team my high school ever had and followed that up by playing on the first team the college I graduated from ever had.  I can honestly say I never envisioned women's collegiate basketball reaching the heights it now currently enjoys.  And yet, I'm saddened to know that male coaches significantly out number female coaches on both the high school and college levels and I don't why that should be. That too, I never expected.  So it seems women still have some more walking to do when it comes leadership roles, and this brings me to Pope Frances and his reforming the Church.

I have really been impressed with Francis in the opening days of his papacy.  He has walked his talk and modeled a very different concept of clerical service from what has previously passed as normal in Rome. I have taken a great deal of hope in his sermons and actions--and I have also carried around a certain undefined nebulous angst that I couldn't identify.  I think I've now identified my angst.  I will not be at all surprised if women under Frances will be allowed to take a higher profile, to operate in more areas, but are never allowed to wield authority in the spiritual or temporal leadership of the Church.  Women will be players, but never coaches.  This is why I am very curious about what Frances will do with the LCWR situation.  EPBXVI through the CDF essentially stated that sisters can play but they will no longer coach themselves.  They have to live their respective charisms using the strategies chalked up for them by their male coaches.  In Catholicism gender complementarity means women do not infringe on the leadership prerogatives of men.  Women are not independent free agents, they are perpetual spiritual dependents.

Frances is going to have to face this gender issue because women no longer accept rigid gender definitions which assign them a dependent role without their consent.  The change in gender definitions for women have by necessity changed the gender definitions for men.  Younger men and women do not see gender in the same rigid terms as previous generations, and this means they see relationships differently.  Marriage is no longer the first relational choice. More and more marriage is coming after children have appeared in the relationship.  The dependency issue has evolved into interdependency as both genders work both inside and outside the home.  Marriage has moved from mother and children dependent on father to children dependent on both parents with less differentiation in roles.  Gay marriage is no threat to this kind of marriage, it only affirms it and this is one reason gay marriage is overwhelmingly accepted by younger generations.  But here's the rub for Catholicism.  This kind of gender equivalency in marriage carries with it a huge threat to  patriarchal religious structures.  It does so because neither gender is operating under those patriarchal definitions and reserving authority strictly to males makes no sense and will make even less sense to children raised in this kind of family. 

A relational arrangement based in an equal interdependence is very different from one based in a dependent form of gender complementarity. If culture in general mirrors family arrangements then we can expect ever further changes in the culture.  The question I have is whether Catholic theology can adapt to changing gender roles and responsibilities.  So far the answer is a resounding "NO".  That will have to change.  The theology will have to adapt to the much larger increase in feminine input and leadership through out the culture.  None of this is going to be easy for a Church which has traditionally been led exclusively by men and whose underlying theology is so dominated by male thinking and male analogies.  

Unfortunately, I don't actually have a lot of hope in Pope Frances taking the Church very far down the road to gender equality, but I do have hope he takes the Church very far down the road in redefining male leadership and how it's expressed.  That would be a bridge to more change in the future and that future could come much quicker than any of us expect.  I certainly never thought I would live to see the day when women's college basketball drew the same sold out crowds the men's version does.