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.

 

 

 

The CDF Names Archbishop Sartain Overseer Of The LCWR

Seattle Archbishop Sartain is now the Pope of the LCWR.  Hope he's still in the mood to allow for a little choice.

Today we not only get the good news about SSPX, we also get the release of the results of the CDF investigation of the Leadership of Catholic Women Religious. This investigation was initiated in 2009 and should not be confused with the Apostolic Visitation of religious orders under the auspices of The Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life headed at the time by Cardinal Rode, and carried out by Mother Mary Claire Millea.  The CDF investigation was after heresy and dissent.  Gosh darn it all, didn't they find just that. I am shocked.

 The following is the final paragraphs of the letter written by the CDF and given to the USCCB.  It names Archbishop Peter Sartain of Seattle as the man assigned to head the five year program whose mandate is to get the ladies in line with the Vatican and redo just about everything involved in the LCWR.  He will be assisted by Bishop Leonard Blair, who conducted this investigation for the Holy See, and Bishop Thomas Paprocki who has garnered some fame for his fascination with exorcisms. (Bishop Paprocki is another one of those intellectual bishops from Illinois.)




Therefore in order to implement a process of review and conformity to the teachings
and discipline of the Church, the Holy See, through the Congregation for the Doctrine of the
Faith, will appoint an Archbishop Delegate, assisted by two Bishops, for review, guidance
and approval, where necessary, of the work of the LCWR. The Delegate will report to the
CDF, which will inform and consult with the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life
and Societies of Apostolic Life and the Congregation for Bishops.
The mandate of the Delegate is to include 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
3) 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.
4) To review and offer guidance in the application of liturgical norms and texts. For
example:
8-The Eucharist and the Liturgy of the Hours will have a place of priority in
LCWR events and programs.
5) To review LCWR links with affiliated organizations, e.g. Network and Resource
Center for Religious Life.
The mandate of the Delegate will be for a period of up to five years, as deemed
necessary. In order to ensure the necessary liaison with the USCCB (in view of Can. 708),
the Conference of Bishops will be asked to establish a formal link (e.g. a committee structure)
with the Delegate and Assistant Delegate Bishops. In order to facilitate the achievement of
these goals, the Delegate is authorized to form an Advisory Team (clergy, women Religious,
and experts) to assist in the work of implementation. (Where have we seen this charade acted out before? Oh, I know, with those ever so effective Diocesan review boards for clerical abusers.)

It will be the task of the Archbishop Delegate to work collaboratively with the officers
of the LCWR to achieve the goals outlined in this document, and to report on the progress of
this work to the Holy See. Such reports will be reviewed with the Delegate at regular
interdicasterial meetings of the CDF and the CICLSAL. In this way, the Holy See hopes to
offer an important contribution to the future of religious life in the Church in the United States.

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

I wrote way back in 2009 that this investigation was aimed specifically to bring the LCWR congregations in line under male leadership, and that the other one conducted by Cardinal Rode was kind of smoke screen.  The Vatican under Cardinal Levada wanted the LCWR leadership muzzled and for political reasons.  This letter certainly states the LCWR will be muzzled.

If readers take the time to read the entire CDF letter, and if you can remember some of the talking points from three years ago, you will laugh.  The letter even mentions the key note address given by Sr Lauri Brink at the 2007 LCWR convention in which she outlined four possible paths that LCWR congregations could take in the future.  She called the third one Soujorning in a New Land not yet Known" and the Fourth one "Reconciliation for the Sake of the Mission".  I knew at the time this third approach had thoroughly upset the Temple Police.  I am hardly surprised this particular speech was singled out in the CDF letter.  I just wonder how many congregations will now take this path rather than put up with the total ecclesial male domination called for by path number four.

April 18th is turning out to be a very sad day for progressive Catholics.  But before more traditional and conservative Catholics take too much delight in this most recent salvo from the Vatican, I hope they think about who the hell is going to foot the bills for the enormous infrastructure of Roman Catholicism when all that's left in the pews is them because the rest of us have gotten the message and left.

The Response From The LCWR To The CDF Is Coming Soon

The Ya Ya Sisterhood could show the Vatican men a thing or two.  So can the LCWR.

I've been meaning to post this essay by Mary C Johnson for about a week, but between actual work, the latest Legion mess, the Vatileaks and Vatican Bank stories, I almost forgot that the LCWR Board meets the end of this week to determine a response, or non response,  to the Vatican's CDF investigation mandate.  The following is an excerpt of this longer article.

The Vatican Lays A Cunning Trap For American Nuns

 Mary C Johnson - Huffington Post - 5/21/5012
At the end of this month, the Leadership Conference of Women Religious will meet to formulate a response to a Vatican trap whose cunning is best appreciated within the long tradition of religious authorities who craft impossible dilemmas for those they perceive as threats.

Two millennia ago, the chief priests sent someone to ask Jesus, "Should we pay taxes?" If Jesus said yes, he would pit himself against Jewish resistance to Roman occupation and therefore, in Jewish eyes, against God. If he said no, the Romans could execute him for sedition. Instead, Jesus famously replied, "Render to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's."

In the 15th century, Joan of Arc's ecclesiastical inquisitors asked her, "Do you know yourself to be in God's grace?" If Joan answered yes, she would commit heresy because the Church had long taught that no one could be certain of being in God's grace; if no, they could interpret her answer as an admission of guilt. Joan looked them in the eyes and replied, "If I am not in God's grace, may God put me there; if I am, may God so keep me."
 
Today, the Vatican tells the women of the LCWR, "Submit to our oversight and control of your every action for the next five years." The Vatican's official "or else" clause remains unstated but clear to all involved. "Submit to our authority, or call yourselves Catholic no longer."......


......In the 50 years following the Second Vatican Council, the American sisters represented by the LCWR have engaged in discernment and renewal, a process initiated by decree of the popes and bishops at the Council. Not without controversy from Catholics nostalgic for long habits and authoritarian discipline, LCWR Sisters have abandoned traditions that infantilized their members. They've educated themselves, many earning advanced degrees. Inspired by the examples of Jesus and the founders of their religious communities, they moved into ministries with people on the margins: prisoners, the homeless, women, gay and lesbian people, immigrants.

And yes, some of them have occasionally spoken to advocate for gay rights, for women's ordination, for a healthcare plan the bishops opposed. Throughout the process, the LCWR has sought "to develop leadership, promote collaboration within church and society, and serve as a voice for systemic change." The Vatican hasn't been happy to see women blossom as real leaders and they especially don't like that "systemic change" stuff......

.......Now the Vatican is telling these women they're not Catholic enough.
If the LCWR submits to Sartain's oversight, they assent to being treated as ecclesiastic children who don't know what's best for them; they relinquish the haven they've created to challenge and support each other. As Sister Jeannnine Grammick, founder of New Ways Ministry, a group that works with gay and lesbian Catholics and has been cited in the Vatican assessment, told The New Republic, "If we comply, if we submit to what is being asked by the Vatican, it would be a repudiation of all the renewal that we've done in religious life. I don't believe that nuns will say we can do that."

If they don't submit, if the sisters disband the LCWR and regroup in a configuration beyond Church control, then the official Church will claim that they aren't really Catholic any more. If the Vatican would declare any group of sisters to be outside the Catholic Church, then those sisters might risk losing anything their communities had accrued over the years -- housing, savings, medical care.

Even more significantly for many, sisters who have never considered themselves anything but Catholic would find themselves banished.

The sisters of the LCWR face two basic choices: submission or exile.
Like Jesus, like Joan of Arc, the sisters may find a way to reframe the discussion -- or they may choose not to respond at all. I'm afraid that ultimately it won't matter. The religious authorities of their days didn't really care how Jesus and Joan responded; in the end, they had Jesus crucified and Joan burned at the stake. In service of Vatican power and the moral authority the bishops claim is theirs alone, what harm is there in inconveniencing a few old nuns? (Yea, really, what's a little elder abuse on top of all the other abuses perpetrated by this hierarchy on lay Catholics?  In for a penny, in for a pound.)

As the sisters gather to formulate their response, their years of prayer and discernment will serve them well. These are strong, centered women placed in an impossible position by powerful men who feel threatened. May Jesus and Joan show them the way.

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

I find both the response of Jesus to the Chief Priests and St Joan's response to her inquisitors brilliant not just because they answered cunning questions, but because they separated out some real truth.  As I look at this LCWR problem, separating out the real truth is not going to be as easy, but the sisters could try a response along these lines:  "We give to Jesus the obedience that is Jesus' and to our order the obedience that is our orders'.   This might work because the Vatican is demanding obedience from the umbrella group the LCWR, and not the individual orders, and secondly sisters do not take vows to the Pope or any bishop.  This way the orders themselves could demand their membership drop out of the LCWR agreeing with the CDF that the LCWR was, oh I don't know, somewhat unwieldy.  That would put Archbishop Sartain in the position of supervising an organization that no longer exists. Should the CDF then push the issue, they would look foolish. On the other hand, looking foolish does not seem to be a problem for the men of the hierarchy.  They are on something of a role with this 'looking foolish thing'.

Once the members of the LCWR made themselves ex members of the LCWR, they could then agree to meet informally once or twice a year for tea and chocolate and a chat around a camp fire.  Kind of like the Ya Ya Sisterhood:

 Little Vivi: These are the headdresses of the queens that have gone before us. They come from Indian holy ground... the jungles of the ancients... prairies of the Norwegians... and the forests of the mighty Amazons. The royal crowns of our people.
[pouring something from a jar into a glass]
Little Vivi: This is the blood of our people, the wolf people, the alligator people, and the moon women from which we gain our strength to rule all worlds.
[Hands glass to Little Teensy. Little Teensy shakes head no]
Little Vivi: It's ok, it's just chocolate.
[Teensy drinks]
Little Vivi: Teensy Melissa Whitman: I declare you, Princess-Naked-As-A-Jaybird.
Little Teensy: [whispers] Ah Cha Cha!
Little Vivi: [turns to Little Caro] Caro Eliza Bennett: I declare you, Duchess Soaring Hawk.
[turns to Little Necie]
Little Vivi: Necie Rose Kelleher: I declare you, Countess Singing Cloud. And I: Viviane Joan Abbott, am hereby and forever Queen Dancing Creek.
[pulls a knife out of a shield]
Little Necie: Now, wait just one second y'all... I don't think we should be cutting ourselves with that knife...
Little Vivi: Silence!
[nicks her hands with knife and passes it down to Little Teensy]
Little Vivi: We are the flames of the fires, the whirling of the winds. We are the waters of the rains and the rivers and the oceans. We are the rocks and the stones. And now by the power invested in me, I declare we are the mighty Ya-Ya priestesses. Let no man put us under. Now our blood flows through each other as it's done for all eternity. Loyal forever. We raise our voices in the words of Mumbo Gumbo... YA-YA!
All little Ya-Ya's: YA-YA!

No offense intended, but you get my drift.  Who needs men supervising them when they have been "the flames of the fires, the whirling of the winds, the waters of the rains and river and oceans.  They are the rocks and the stone......and the blood that built the American Church.   Amen Sisters.  YEA-YEA!
 

Catholic Dialogue: A Long And Winding Road

Some of those crazy Franciscans who support the LCWR.  In spite of the religious apparel, I'm not sure these men are Bill Donohue's kind of Catholic.

An Op Ed piece in the NY Times by Bill Keller has been generating a lot of commentary today.  In this piece Keller basically agrees with Wild Bill Donohue that it's time progressive and centrist Catholics abandon ship.  The battle over the soul of the Church has been won by the righteous right and these winners will not tolerate the presence of the losers.  Wild Bill will gladly hold the door open for us as we exit.

In my own mind I actually see this split differently.  It is really a tussle between those who have a need to be validated and motivated by an external authority structure and those who have fought through that and operate from an internalized structure. The two don't necessarily wind up in different places as far as behaviors, but they most certainly present an entirely different attitude towards others and towards ones self.  One is based in absolute truths defined by an accepted authority, and one is based in process dynamics in which one moves towards the ideal and is motivated internally because they have validated the 'rightness' of a particular behavior in their own experience. 

This, it seems to me, is what Cardinal Levada may mean when he describes the dust up between the CDF and the LCWR as a potential 'dialogue with the deaf'.  Most members of the LCWR don't operate from a need for external validation concerning their faith and therefore don't have much need for the CDF.  The CDF, on the other hand, owes it's existence as the source of Catholic authority precisely for those who need external validation---unfortunately this includes most of it's own members.  The seeming indifference of the LCWR becomes a real threat precisely because it eats at the core reason for the CDF's existence.  

But more than that, if members of the LCWR, who are all women, have internalized their value system and Faith expression, this very trait undercuts the Vatican's teachings on sexual complimentarity, which in it's core language implies women need to account for themselves to eternal male authority.  I think it's this recognition on the part of the CDF which necessitated accusing the LCWR of 'radical feminism' amongst a list of other sexual disciplinary issues---because according to the theory of  gender complementarity,  it IS a form of radical feminism if women are answering to themselves or their own leadership rather than their male superiors.  In this sense, it is the very existence of the LCWR as a leadership conference and the independent thinking it represents, that is the real issue.  It undercuts so much of what Pope Benedict teaches about gender and sexuality.  Hence Cardinal Levada and Archbishop Sartain are going to great lengths to separate their criticism of the leadership organization from the vast majority of sisters it represents.  They seem to be saying it's the idea of independent female leadership that's at issue, not individual women who don't hold leadership positions.  The CMSWR is not at fault because their leadership is content to be a funnel for the words of wisdom cascading down from male leadership and they are quite willing to subordinate their leadership role to men.  

I suspect Cardinal Levada is correct, and this will be a dialogue of the deaf if the CDF and LCWR don't admit to the real issues and road blocks between them.  The male leadership of the Roman Catholic Church is demanding a true Catholic is one whose behavior is determined and whose salvation is procured by obeying and being rewarded by external authority--especially for Catholic women.  I call this the 'merit badge or military school' form of spirituality.  Uniforms and titles, ranked clerical dress, religious habits etc. are big issues for this mindset.  It's all external and has a lot of visual validation.  It's pretty far from the LCWR or Vatican II mindset which was all about internalizing Catholicism and living it reflexively because it was who you were--and it was not dependent on one's gender.  It was not something you had to think about much less wear like some merit badge which separated you from the sinful masses.

In the long run I don't think it will make much difference in the mission of LCWR congregations if the CDF decides to follow through on Cardinal Levada's veiled threats.  People will know the LCWR women exactly as Jesus told his followers they would be known, not by their uniforms or subservient female obedience, but by their love. 

It does seem that some of the USCCB, and especially the American Cardinals in Rome, have a politically vested interest in making this caricature of the LCWR seem not only plausible but true.

I haven't written much on the LCWR visitation lately. Part of that is because Mother Millea's visitation has been thoroughly covered elsewhere. My other reason is I have been waiting for some information on the other investigation of the doctrinal questions of the LCWR leadership which originated with Cardinal Levada and the CDF. I really believe Mother Millea's investigation is designed to give more support for the Vatican when the hammer comes down from the CDF on the LCWR leadership conference. The following is an excerpt from an NCR article by Tom Fox which is hugely 'enlightening' about the CDF investigation.

Describing the gathering as “frank and open,” the leadership team wrote that it had insisted at the meeting it does not support abortion, but did support the idea of speaking out on a political issue.

“We clarified that LCWR does not support abortion and that we have made this position clear,” the letter said. “We explained that we feel a moral imperative to see that there is health care coverage for all persons, and that we believe this bill will guarantee that more than 30 million uninsured persons would finally be provided health care.” The letter added: “We were very clear in stating that our actions were not in opposition to the U.S. bishops.” (It looks to me like Olmstead's actions in Phoenix are designed to demonstrate that the LCWR is dishonest when they say they don't support abortion. The timing of his announced excommunication of Sr. McBride and these meetings between the LCWR and the Vatican is most 'interesting'.)

The Leadership Conference told its membership that Levada was concerned that the organization’s actions “were being interpreted as a public display of disunity within the church and that they undercut the perception of the church as one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic.”

The conference said it responded, speaking of the necessity to be able to exercise “rights, duties, and obligations as citizens.” The letter stated that Levada acknowledged women religious operate in two worlds -- as Catholics and as citizens. However, he insisted that the bishops are the ones who make key decisions in matters of faith and morals. (This is more affirmation that the USCCB is embarking on a path which makes voting a question of following Catholic morality as taught by the USCCB.)

Addressing the doctrinal assessment, the letter indicated the women expressed surprise as some of the materials requested by the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith “go beyond the scope of a doctrinal assessment.” The letter did not elaborate on what those materials are.

The Vatican requests, the letter stated, caused the women to ask if the process “had moved beyond an assessment and into an investigation of LCWR.”

The letter did not indicate how Levada responded to the question.

Levada told the women, the letter stated, that once Blair sends his final report to the congregation, his assessment will be sent for review to different groups, including “a subcommission, the American cardinals in Rome, and perhaps some others.” Levada explained he will then consult with Rodé and develop a final report that will be presented to Pope Benedict XVI. (Cardinals who are no longer bound by US tax law as it pertains to promotion of political causes.)

Blair’s diocesan director of communications, Sally A. Oberski, said the bishop has a policy of not speaking with the media about the assessment.

According to the letter, the leadership team met the next day, April 24, with Rodé and members of his congregation. Again, Vatican officials queried the women about the conference’s support for the health care legislation.

The meeting moved on to discussions about the apostolic visitation and to a Leadership Conference statement approved at its 2009 national assembly in New Orleans. That statement, “LCWR Call,” was intended to set a five-year course for the organization.

“We discussed at length the LCWR support of the health care bill. The cardinal stated his belief that we cannot defend our position because it was contrary to the bishops,” the letter went on. “We again clarified that we do not support abortion and that we are quite aware that we are citizens of our country who must take action, and we base our actions upon our understanding of all the moral imperatives brought to the table within this particular piece of legislation.”

The letter said Rodé instructed the women that “LCWR cannot declare a pastoral direction since this responsibility belongs to the episcopal conference alone and, he noted, that by our actions we broke unity. We reiterated our view that we do not support abortion and our belief that the moral imperative of providing health care for more than 30 million uninsured was an action we had to support.” (Again Rode equates political with pastoral.)

According to the letter, the women noted “some the benefits we have experienced [in the apostolic visitation], including the support and appreciation women religious have received from the public, as well as the opportunity to learn more about the rights and duties of religious within the church. We also noted that the process has caused confusion among our members because neither we nor the U.S. bishops were well-informed about all aspects of the apostolic visitation.” (Yes, the vast majority of the US Bishops were left in the dark by their American brethren in Rome.)

The letter stated Rodé spoke of “his serious concern over the many congregations that did not complete the entire apostolic visitation questionnaire.”

It stated that a doctrinal congregation staff member, Passionist Fr. Leonello Leidi, reiterated that Mother Mary Clare Millea, in her position as apostolic visitator, “is the vicar of the pope,” and that the actions of some religious communities that did not fully comply in answering visitation questionnaires last year were acting in “open opposition” to Rome.

The letter stated that Leidi spoke of “possible consequences for leaders who may be judged as disobedient.”

The women religious leadership team asked Rodé what he hoped would be the final outcome of the visitation, the letter noted.

“He responded by saying that he understands that women religious have historically worked for migrants and persons who are poor, and acknowledged that we have built schools and hospitals and have provided services to many people. He expressed a desire to get a clear, objective view of religious life as it is lived today and that a focus be placed on values, life in community, prayer, and living the evangelical life.”

The letter stated that the meeting ended with the cardinal making two recommendations: that the Leadership Conference of Women Religious be clear about its position on abortion, and that it invite members to collaborate with the apostolic visitation process.

“He again stated that LCWR has influence and we must use it to support the church and its efforts. He further indicated that he has spoken with Pope Benedict about the apostolic visitation and noted that the pope is concerned and may be making a statement about the process or may ask Cardinal Rodé to issue a statement.” (There's the real rub. Why do I get the feeling the LCWR can do what ever they want with the sick and poor as long as they do not drag those concerns into political views which impact the wealthy and powerful.)

The letter ended with the leadership team saying it will keep members informed about other aspects of the visit.

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

This is such an interesting article. It's pretty obvious, at least to me, that the real concern of the Cardinals in Rome, especially the American ones, is that the LCWR demonstrated they have serious political influence. Forget the gibberish about pastoral confusion. That's not the issue. The issue is political influence. This whole thing is about power politics, not Roman Catholic orthodoxy. If there's an orthodoxy in current Catholic politics it seems to be that it's OK to do anything you want for the poor as long as you leave the wealthy and powerful alone. Stay in the soup kitchens and out of Congress like the True Catholics do. Believe it when we tell you your vote is a moral issue over which we have Christ's teaching authority. If we can't trust you to do that we might just put you back behind convent walls where you can't be such a political rival.

What's good for the wealthy and the powerful must be good for everybody the thinking seems to go. That's been pretty traditional thinking for eons and it's been supported by the Vatican for eons. Liberation theology was fine and dandy until it got political and it's politics pointed to the wealthy as the political problem. Communism was way worse than fascism because unlike fascism, communism didn't include a place for the Church and had no intention of sharing the wealth. No quid pro quo with those atheistic godless commies. Indulgences and death bed confessions aren't worth too much in the Communist system.

Since I've gotten a tad cynical I guess I will stop here. Keep up the good work LCWR because you really do speak pastorally and politically for a whole bunch of us.

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.

It Really All Comes Down To A Difference In Consciousness And Vision

Carl Anderson and his clerical sycophants at the recently completed international K of C conference which ran from August 7-9.  Carl may have had the attention of all the Catholic hierarchy, but the LCWR convention had the attention of all the media, and Carl well knows, that's priceless.

The LCWR finished their deliberations on Friday and released their response concerning the mandate from the CDF.  Two ideas struck me as important, the idea that dialogue with their bishop overseers could result in an understanding that the Church of the future must open up meaningful avenues of participation for religious and laity, but especially women; and that they will insist the dialogue be between equals and will cease dialogue if they sense the path forward includes compromising the integrity of their mission.  I take this to mean there will be no such thing as compromising their integrity to avoid scandal to the Church or embarrassment to the hierarchy, ala Msgr Lynn in Philadelphia.

The following are a couple of excerpts from a piece written by Tom Fox of the National Catholic Reporter.  Fox was a presenter at the conference and was there for it's entirety.  He has presented a first person summary that I found fascinating:


......Coming after several days of deliberations, the LCWR statement is anchored in an unstated belief in process, of forward movement, and a sense that at this time in history women are being asked by nature itself to lead the way. It is also anchored in a belief in a loving God who not only created the universe, but who also remains active in it, as the Second Vatican Council has taught. (I think women are most certainly being asked to step up to the plate and add their input as equals.  The men have come to the end of their time as sole arbitrators of cultural mores and direction.)

The women see this God Spirit walking among us and before us and calling us forth. Sometimes in our hostile and uninviting world, they seem to say, this requires special courage. The women view this as part of an evolutionary process. And while our common journeys, as experience shows, are fraught with peril, (personal and institutional sin are very much part of our story), the women paint a hopeful picture, one in which women and men of good will can work together on behalf of justice to build the Reign of God on earth. 

This vision is a distinctly Catholic sacramental vision growing out of ancient Catholic traditions, more recently contextualized by the writing of the late Jesuit Father Teilhard de Chardin, as well as Passionist Father Thomas Berry and captured in conference talks by the futurist Barbara Marx Hubbard.

It is a vision articulated, in part, in the closing address by then LCWR President Franciscan Sister Pat Farrell to the sisters on the last night of the assembly. She said:
“Many institutions, traditions, and structures seem to be withering. Why? I believe the philosophical underpinnings of the way we’ve organized reality no longer hold. The human family is not served by individualism, patriarchy, a scarcity mentality, or competition. The world is outgrowing the dualistic constructs of superior/inferior, win/lose, good/bad, and domination/submission. Breaking through in their place are equality, communion, collaboration, synchronicity, expansiveness, abundance, wholeness, mutuality, intuitive knowing, and love. This shift, while painful, is good news! It heralds a hopeful future for our Church and our world. As a natural part of evolutionary advance, it in no way negates or undervalues what went before. Nor is there reason to be fearful of the cataclysmic movements of change swirling around us. We only need to recognize the movement, step into the flow, and be carried by it. Indeed, all creation is groaning in one great act of giving birth.”......

..... Our women religious, represented in the LCWR leadership, recognize more than most the dis-spirited nature of our times. Theirs is an alternative vision. It is a vision that proclaims that Christian communities are intrinsically hopeful, that they believe in the goodness of all people, and that these communities must never stop being living examples of the full embrace and acceptance, which Jesus taught.

Specifically, these women appear to have growing confidence that that the pastoral vision of church that grew out of the Second Vatican Council, a vision that moved them obediently to renew their congregational charters decades back, is, indeed, the church of the future, and that after 50 years this church, in part through them, is coming to fruition. It is a church containing the collective yearnings and aspirations of untold millions of lay Catholics throughout the world, laity these religious women among them.

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

I've done a lot of posts on this blog about the LCWR, about the failed leadership of the hierarchy, about the futility of the return to the past embodied in the 'reform of the reform', about the radical masculinism embodied in Catholic leadership, and about the shift in consciousness the world is currently undergoing.  I have written all these words because they describe the 'knowledge' many contemplatives, psychics, and mystics are receiving all across the globe, and all across spiritual systems.  The way humanity is beginning to see itself, the way cultures are organizing themselves, and even the way our technology is evolving, all point to exactly what Sr Pat Farrell describes:  

"The world is outgrowing the dualistic constructs of superior/inferior, win/lose, good/bad, and domination/submission. Breaking through in their place are equality, communion, collaboration, synchronicity, expansiveness, abundance, wholeness, mutuality, intuitive knowing, and love."

The power structures of the old consciousness will not give up easily.  They will fight tooth and nail to keep the status quo, to keep themselves in power, to control the present moment in order to preserve the future for their past.  This is one explanation for the polarization with in the Church and with in the politics of the United States.  We hear a great deal from our conservative religious leadership about traditional Catholicism with it's unchanging truth.  We hear a great deal from our conservative politicians about returning the United States to it's divinely ordained founding principles, and both conservative groups have targeted women's reproductive issues and gays as their pivotal issues around which real Catholics and real Americans must rally both flag and cross.   

This is symbolically seen at the K of C international conference which was attended by 12 Cardinals, 70+ bishops, and of course the ubiquitous Catholic republican operative Carl Anderson.  The Kof C convention ran during the exact time frame as the LCWR convention.  The LCWR had one bishop at their opening Mass and only their Vatican watchdog, Bishop Blair, in attendance at the conference.  This discrepancy is really quite sad and quite pathetic.

In the meantime the ground swell of opposition to this old world view of reality is beginning to coalesce as the over ripe 'fruits' of this old energy continue to rot.  The Arab spring and the Occupy movement are just the beginning.  As world food shortages reach new levels this coming winter, the unrest will continue to escalate.  The only answer the old energy will have is the only one they've ever had, military power and armed conquest---domination not dialogue.

In reading the comments on the NCR after numerous articles about the LCWR answer it struck me that some people didn't really get the gist of this message.  The LCWR is letting the CDF know in gentle, if no uncertain terms, that they will only enter any dialogue as equals.  No ring kissing, no bowing, no scraping, no unearned deference just because Sartain and company are men with white collars and purple piping.  Those days are long gone for this group of women.  That in itself is a major statement of their own changing world view as it concerns themselves, but there was also a second message.  They will not compromise their integrity, and that means the world view in which it is based.  These women are not interested in the 'reform of the reform' or returning to the guilt driven ever so transcendent church before Vatican II.  They are committed to the Vatican II vision of the world, because that vision is the future.  The boys may have run from their own vision for Catholicism, but the girls aren't and won't.  That is the final and perhaps core message in the LCWR response.

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.

Some Strong Words From Sr Joan Chittister, Plus Cardinal Levada On....Product Identity?

According to Cardinal Levada, Sr Joan is one of those LCWR types which is not on board with his version of  CDF 'product identity'.

I came across this interview with Sr Joan Chittister on Huffington Post in an article written by Paul Brandeis Raushenbush. Mr Raushenbush has been mentored by Sr Joan and also worked and studied with other LCWR members at Union Theological Seminary. His view of the LCWR/CDF clash  is uniquely informative since his is a protestant perspective.  Sr Joan pulls no punches, but then when  a person reaches a certain age in life, it's kind of pointless to beat around the bush.

On the CDF side of things, Cardinal Levada gave a rather aggressive and none to flattering assessment to NCR's John Allen after Tuesday's meeting at the Vatican with LCWR leaders Sr Janet Mock and Sr Pat Farrell.  There was something about 'dialogue of the deaf', Bernie Law not being involved at all, irritation that Fr Charles Curran had been a speaker and the Barbara Marx Hubbard was to be this year, and this observational gem: ""Too many people crossing the LCWR screen, who are supposedly representing the Catholic church, aren't representing the church with any reasonable sense of product identity," Levada said. Hmm product identity?  He also more or less stated the LCWR could easily be replaced by some other Vatican appointed umbrella organization and that should the LCWR incorporate under secular law the Vatican would have nothing to do with them.  All in all his assessment was not a particularly believable presentation of the Vatican's willingness to dialogue. Unless dialogue means we tell you what your product identity is and they you go sell it.  Anyway here's Sr Joan.

So what is this all about Sister Joan?

"Well it is a hostile take over, there's no doubt about that. They're 'cleaning up the church' -- everything but themselves." (touche')

One of the speculations is that the crackdown has its roots in the nun's support for President Obama's health care bill.

I don't know about that for sure, but it seems like it may have been a turning point. It [the nun's position] was a model of thinking Catholic, thinking through this thing and coming up with another approach. There are other ways to impact the issue you care about.
Part of it, whether they know it or not, is a strong demonstration of the whole male/female aspect of every question. Sit down and shut up. Daddy knows best. We will tell you what to think, we will tell you what to do -- what would a woman know? (Really, what would a woman know about the female reproductive system if men didn't tell us?)

How are the Sisters are holding up?

There is prayer and fasting going on for the sake of the LCWA officers. We want to give them all the support we can. The sisters are mightily concerned, but they know there is no substance to these accusations. For instance, to talk about radical feminism when you don't have a clue as to what it is -- it is very embarrassing. Because the people who do know what it is sit back and say What?. It's bizarre.

There is a serious power play going on. It seems like they could take over.

Yes. Theoretically they can do it. If you were ranking the departments of the Curia, the CDF would be the ultimate department -- from which there is no official appeal.
No doubt that it is serious, but it's also putting people in a corner that nobody should. And not these people [in CDF]. And the lay people know that. If there is integrity left in this church it is in the people who are ministry on the streets.

Which are the nuns.
Yes. (Not just the nuns, there are good priests, good brothers, and whole lot of good laity.)

Say this plays out -- do you ever think about leaving the church?

I don't seek to do that, I'm a Catholic, born and bred, I have learned that the tradition and the institution have often been at odds in the history of the Catholic Church.
The church has always converted slowly. The last time their sins were pointed out it took them 400 years to say that Martin Luther was right and that they shouldn't have been selling relics and that maybe people could read the scriptures in their own language and read the word of Jesus themselves.
It was the same thing. 'We tell you what to think about scriptures, because you will destroy the sacred word. You won't understand it. You'll destroy it.' We got through that. God willing we will get through this.
My fear is not the people who organize to leave the church, it is the amount of disillusionment and depression that is out there because of the church itself.
Everybody talks about how the Pope wants a smaller, purer church. Well, they talked about that in the 16th century. And they got it -- they lost half of Europe. Now they are losing Ireland, Austria, the American church is teetering. You have people who love their faith but cannot support these acts by the institution.

What happened to Vatican II?

Good question, somebody hijacked it when we weren't looking. Maybe this is the moment that we all decide what happened to Vatican II. Clearly there is an element of the institution that wants Vatican II destroyed, eliminated. That's because it makes the whole church, the church. For the very first time in history, Vatican II made being laity a vocation, and the laity have taken that seriously. So they are standing up in the streets to say what the church needs to study and make a decision

It's tricky, I'm a Protestant writing about this because I feel so strongly about supporting my mentors, but many will criticize me because I am not Catholic.

We are all Christians in this together, what happens to this church does affect you as a Christian. It will affect the way others see Christians around the world. We are not in this alone The laity are being very clear about that, not just because they have loved Sisters or see the work they are doing, because they know that this is damaging the church.
The whole notion that you would suppress thought and call that Catholic, call that Christian, call that a witness to adult ministry in an adult world is impossible to compute. Write this as a Christian. Don't absent yourself here, I need you.

Well, a lot of us are concerned and not sure what to do when someone holds all the trump cards.

Oh, there is no doubt about it; people may be destroyed here. And there may be people who want them destroyed. They either want thinking adults in the church who bring their own experience of the Holy Spirit to every question -- with great respect for the institution, ironically, or they don't. (It's kind of obvious they don't want independent thinking adults of any sort-lay, religious, or clerical.)

I assume you saw the critique on Sister Margaret Fawley's book?

Oh, I can't tell you what that did to me. But that woman is so bright, and so precise. Her responses are superb; she said: "I never said I was producing Catholic doctrine. I'm a theologian, thinking through these issues. "
When you want to make all your thinkers parrots, puppets, don't talk to me about your respect for the Holy Spirit.

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

I think it would be worth watching if Sr Joan Chittister debated Cardinal Levada.  Neither one pulls any punches or shirks in their defense of their own positions. We'd need a good moderator though, someone who could keep the debate fair and entertaining.  Maybe Stephen Colbert, ...well, maybe not.  Anyway, doesn't look like there is going to be much dialogue unless Archbishop Sartain goes a little rogue and a little outside the product identity plan of Cardinal Levada and the prayers and fasting of the LCWR shakes up a whole lot of spirit.  In the meantime, the CDF may rue the day the riled up the American laity, because Sr Joan is quite right about this, there is a lot of "disillusionment and depression that is out there because of the church itself".

Vatican Men Enter The Uppity Liberal American Nun Battle

The LCWR readies for battle with Bishop Blair.

The following is an excerpt from a longer article published on the NCR website yesterday.

It deals with a second investigation the Vatican is launching into the state of American Religious Women. This second investigation involves the Leadership Conference of Women Religious. The LCWR represents approximately 95% of American Religious Women. It is an association of leaders of Congregations of Religious Orders. It is somewhat analogous to the USCCB in that it's composed of the leadership of the various orders. It certainly isn't analogous in any sense of authority.

The Vatican assessment has become necessary, according to Levada, because at the 2001 meeting between the women’s leadership conference and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which took place in Rome, the women were invited “to report on the initiatives taken or planned” to promote the reception of three areas of Vatican doctrinal concern: the 1994 apostolic letter Ordinatio sacerdotalis, the 2000 declaration Dominus Jesus from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and “the problem of homosexuality.” (At least they seem to have gotten the abortion thing right.)

Ordinatio sacerdotalis, Latin for “On the Ordination to the Priesthood,” was a Vatican document that reasserted that Catholic ordination to the priesthood is reserved for men alone and that the church “has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women.” (I've always found it kind of fascinating that this is the only issue on which the church claims they have no authority.)

Dominus Jesus was a declaration that, in part, insisted that non-Catholic Christians are “in a gravely deficient situation in comparison with those who, in the church, have the fullness of the means of salvation” and that non-Catholic Christian communities suffer “defects.” It was viewed at the time by some Catholic theologians and leaders of other religions as a major setback in interreligious dialogue. (That's because it was a major setback.)

In a 1986 letter written by then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict, to the world’s bishops, he wrote: “Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder.” (The most misleading term in this sentence is to refer to homosexuality as an 'inclination' as opposed to an intrinsic orientation. Notice how the word intrinsic is used to describe it's moral evil. In other words, this is the devil's work and not a God given orientation.)

Regarding the investigation of the women’s leadership conference, Levada informed conference leaders: “Given both the tenor and the doctrinal content of various addresses given at the annual assemblies of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious in the intervening years, this Dicastery can only conclude that the problems which had motivated its request in 2001 continue to be present.” (It's only been eight years, at least you could have given them fifty years like you did Maciel and the Legion.)

As a result, Levada said, the Vatican had decided “a doctrinal assessment” of the “activities and initiatives of the LCWR would be helpful.” (I'm quite sure that's already been done and that the answer to that has already been written.)

Levada added that the decision was reached while in communication with Cardinal Franc Rodé, prefect of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life.
Under Rodé’s leadership, his congregation last December announced it had begun its own investigation of U.S. women’s religious communities with the expressed aim of assessing the “quality of life” among their members and to determine why numbers of women religious have fallen in recent decades.

The Rodé study is being conducted under the direction of the superior general of the Apostles of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, Mother Clare Millea, whom Rodé appointed as apostolic visitator.
The new assessment of the women’s leadership conference, Levada stated in his letter, will be conducted by Leonard P. Blair, bishop of Toledo, Ohio, a member of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Doctrine. (Bishop Blair is as orthodox as they come. So orthodox he himself says the Extraordinary form of the Mass.)

Levada said Blair’s principal purpose is to “review the work of the LCWR in supporting its membership as communities of faith and witness to Christ in today’s church, and to offer any useful assistance.”

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

It looks to me like the big boys in the Vatican decided Mother Clare Millea wasn't up to the task of taking on the big bad women of the LCWR. Apparently Mother Millea doesn't have the right equipment to represent Jesus in this task of investigating American Women Religious. First and foremost I see this second investigation as a major insult to her and her abilities. If Mother Millea actually thought she had the confidence of the Vatican, I guess she now knows she doesn't.

The commentary on the NCR site was interesting to read. There weren't near the number of orthodox coming out to support the CDF as there were for the announcement of the first investigation. Are even the orthodox a little queasy about this second investigation? Why do American nuns merit two Vatican investigations when the Legion reluctantly only gets one, and the seminaries who cranked out all those abusers only got one? Does this mean uppity nuns are more intrinsically evil than sexually abusive priests? Or does it just mean it involves tricky treacherous women and tricky treacherous women need two Vatican salvos, not just one.

I keep waiting for the Vatican investigation into the USCCB and their penchant for covering up sexual abusers. Seems to me that's done a whole lot more damage to the American Catholic church than the tricky treacherous uppity nuns of the LCWR. Why that's even cost some dioceses to throw convents of nuns out on the street so they could sell off their property to pay off lawyers and abuse victims.

Of course those nuns were also placed under a gag order and removed from their property under their vows of obedience. Those are REAL nuns, not uppity treacherous liberal nuns. On the other hand there are these observations from an ex nun in the above linked article.

"One of the reasons I left is you have no voice," said Gutierrez, who wore the habit for eight years in the 1960s. Now retired from a second career teaching English, she expressed dismay that the Los Angeles archdiocese, after being pilloried for its reluctance to investigate allegations of sexual abuse, appeared to have gone to ground again.

"It's the same mistake all over again: 'Be quiet, be quiet. Don't say anything. Don't rock the boat,' " Gutierrez said.

Another former Bethany sister, Evangelina Diaz, said the defensive posture was also apt to hurt recruiting, seldom easy for the Catholic Church in recent decades.

"Look, a gag rule on three nuns! Holy mackerel!" said Diaz, 74, in the parking lot outside the convent. "They do this to the ones who've been around for 57 years? No wonder they don't get more vocations. Would you want to join?"

Perhaps Mother Millea will want to investigate why an Archdiocese would kick out three old nuns in order to sell their property. It may shed some light on quality of life issues as well as the recruitment problem.

I hardly think Bishop Leonard Blair would be motivated to take on such an investigation himself. He's had his own problems since coming to the Diocese of Toledo, and my gosh, one of his biggest problems involved an uppity nun.

This link is actually pretty fascinating. Toledo happened to be home to one of the most sensational of the abuse stories. A story that involved satanic ritual abuse, the murder of a nun and the subsequent cover up by both the diocese and the Toledo police. The priest, Fr. George Robinson was convicted in 2006 and sentenced to 15 years to life in prison.

Another kind of fascinating coincidence is that Toledo is the home diocese of Barbara Blaine the president of SNAP. The USCCB considers Barbara Blaine to be a very uppity and treacherous woman. She is not particularly fond of Bishop Blair and I'm sure the feeling is mutual. SNAP and the diocese waged quite a battle over opening a window of opportunity for abuse victims beyond the statutory limit. This was the Ohio bill for which Bishop Tom Gumbleton testified and where he admitted to his own abuse by a cleric. It was subsequently amended to remove the year window and then signed into law.

Bishop Blair did himself proud to get that year window out of SB 17 and now he gets to take on the LCWR. Barbara Blaine could probably give the LCWR some insight into the strategies of Bishop Blair---one of which was to call in the male clerical troops to take on uppity lay legislators from their pulpits. Apparently it worked well enough to get SB 17 amended to the Bishop's liking.

Personally, I'd love to see Bishop Blair go toe to toe with Sr. Joan Chittister. I'm sure Blair would win the day, having the entire Vatican male clerical corp behind him, but Sr. Joan would win the war of words, and in the end that's real power.

In the meantime, Mother Clare Millea has already been run over by the male clerical corp in their obsession with uppity liberal American nuns. I wonder if she realizes she has their tread marks all over her body?