In a Current Comment this week America's editors asked some questions about the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith's (CDF) "Doctrinal Assessment" of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR). "First, there is the history of the assessment. Catholics in the United States and elsewhere are curious about where it came from. How did it originate? Who were the petitioners?" Now Robert Mickens, the Rome correspondent for The (London) Tablet focuses on this question in the Tablet's latest issue, in an article entitled "Rome's Three-Line Whip." He begins as far back as the 1980s, but the story picks up in the 1990s, as Mickens reports.
By the late 1990s, they [conservative bishops in the US, according to Mickens] began taking their complaints about the sisters to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) in Rome. The CDF, under the then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, even issued a doctrinal warning against the organisation in 2001, though the last remnant of a more conciliar group of US bishops was able to stave off any direct Vatican intervention.
The saga entered a new phase in 2005 when Cardinal Ratzinger was elected Pope. He quickly appointed the then Archbishop William Levada of San Francisco to his old post as CDF prefect. Significantly, the soon-to-be Cardinal Levada was also chairman of the doctrinal committee of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB). According to sources in Rome and Washington, his successor at the conference’s doctrinal office –the then Bishop William Lori of Bridgeport, Connecticut – was the man who formally petitioned the CDF to launch the current doctrinal investigation of the LCWR. Cardinal Bernard Law, who was forced to resign as Archbishop of Boston in 2002 because of his perceived mishandling of the clerical sex-abuse crisis, was reportedly the person in Rome most forcefully supporting Bishop Lori’s proposal.
Both Cardinal Law and Archbishop Lori (he was appointed to the prestigious see of Baltimore in March) have long supported women’s religious orders that have distanced themselves from the LCWR. Cardinal Law, 80, staffs his residence in Rome with the Mercy Sisters of Alma (Michigan) and Archbishop Lori, 61, helped set up several traditional communities of sisters during his tenure in Bridgeport (2001-12). All these communities, marked by their loyalty to the hierarchy, belong to the Conference of Major Superiors of Women Religious (CMSWR), which broke away from the LCWR in 1992.
Incidentally, Cardinal Law was a member of the Vatican’s Congregation for Religious when it launched its own visitation – separate from the CDF investigation – of women’s communities in the US. According to news reports, that project was at least partially funded by the Knights of Columbus, a wealthy fraternal order of Catholic men for whom Archbishop Lori has been supreme chaplain since 2005. Under the leadership of an influential Washington lawyer and former Reagan White House official, Carl Anderson, the knights have increasingly backed conservative causes and routinely make sizeable donations to the Holy See. Mr Anderson is a member or consultor of several Vatican offices, and one of the five-man board of directors for the so-called Vatican Bank. His close association with the Vatican and Archbishop Lori, and the archbishop’s own determination to bring the LCWR into line, should not be underestimated.
After appointing Bishop Leonard Blair of Toledo (Ohio) to conduct the initial phase of the controversial investigation of the Leadership Conference, the CDF has now asked Archbishop J. Peter Sartain of Seattle to lead phase two. He heads a three-man team (which includes Blair) to reform the organization or, in the CDF’s sanitised words, “to implement a process of review and conformity to the teachings and discipline of the Church”. --
It's hard to discern the Holy Spirit in this sordid narrative. I pray that the LCWR continue to lead by example.
Why isn't he in jail!
Somehow it's not surprising that he would be involved in this unsavory business!
Law, Lori, Ratzinger, Levada, Anderson - what a sterling group to take on the LCWR. I hope the women have a few surprises for them. The power dynamics are much in evidence.
An early step in this direction is taken in the Assessment Mandate for Implementation (p.8): “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.” Note that the USCCB link is not with the LCWR but with its 3 external overseers, who are already members of the USCCB. Details remain to be seen.
Of course, I understand the need to temper comments for Catholic journalism. I'm just pointing it out since many religious women were the first to support and respond to those who were hurt by the Church. Though it should be noted that some did NOT respond, and more hurt continued, it took great courage to stand up for the powerless, since those who responded were treated as betraying the Church.
good morning, I am reposting the comment I forwarded this morning to America. It is helpful when seeking to find answers. take care
good morning,
I could not agree more with you: we need to be calm and respectful.
The following information, published on 4/27/2012 by Catholic News Service (http://?www.catholicnews.com/data/?stories/cns/1201700.htm), answers most of the questions you raised. Your readers will find the information helpful
(1) How did it originate?: "1971: Some nuns who disapprove of LCWR's new directions create a new organization, the Consortium Perfectae Caritatis. They are concerned that what they consider necessary, distinctive elements of religious life - such as a common identifying garb, community life and religious obedience to a superior as traditionally understood - are disappearing among American sisters. In the early 1970s the consortium seeks recognition from Rome as an alternative conference to the LCWR".
(2) Who were the petitioners?: Perhaps, the Consortium Perfectae Caritatis and the Institute on Religious Life. "The Institute on Religious Life is established to promote vocations and religious life in the United States. The Chicago-based organization is open to laity, priests and men religious as well, but women religious - most of them linked with the consortium - make up the bulk of its membership".
(3) Was the U.S. bishops’ conference ever involved or consulted? When and how?: "1983: Archbishop John R. Quinn of San Francisco is named by Pope John Paul to conduct a Vatican-mandated study of U.S. religious life. He transforms the study into a nationwide dialogue over the next three years. The study is completed in 1986 with a 152-page report to Rome". "1987: As a follow-up to the Quinn study, the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Conference of Major Superiors of Men and the LCWR decide to reinforce strengthened bishop-religious relations on an ongoing basis with a new Tri-Conference Commission of Religious and NCCB. 1988: The Forum of Major Superiors, a new organization of women superiors formed in 1987 by the Institute on Religious Life, unsuccessfully petitions the bishops for a place on the commission".
(4) When and why and at whose request were Network and the Resource Center for Religious Institutes added to the inquiry?: I suspect in 1987.
take care and have a nice day.
CNS STORY: Timeline of Vatican relations with US women religious since 1950s
www.catholicnews.com
It seems like it is the two-fold dimension of this that has rightfully upset us - that the nuns are attacked when the vast majority have been the best examples of Christ's love andservice that the Church has produced AND the fact that it's the hierarchy that cannot police itself that is the agent of the attack and has just created the other brouhaha about contraception which ws in no one's mind!
.
Just today our secular newspaper issued a strong editorial echoing what sime of us had already sent letters on - a real departure though to bring up this topic on a secular level when they had barely covered the story except for Dowd's and Kristof's columns.
Let's see how Philadelphia and Kansas City come out... I stiill believe this has been in part about good offense to distract all.
In 1979 Sister Theresa Kane R.S.M., past president of the LCWR, made her (in?)famous plea to Pope John Paul II to include women in ALL ministries of the church, including ordination, during his visit to the United States. At that time, Cardinal Levada, then Monsignor Levada, was working in the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (1976 to 1982).
Archbishop Sartain’s sister is a member of the Dominican Sisters of St. Cecilia (Nashville Dominican), a traditional order that has membership in the Council of Major Superiors of Women Religious (CMSWR). (a “conflict of interest”?)
In that post, he gave a meditation for "staying 'in' the church." In this post, he gives another reason for not doing so.
This type of behavior is not "church." I know well tthe ecclesiology of semper reformanda and the "pilgrim church' and the "soiled but yet beloved Bride of Christ," but there may be times...
This kind of clerical malevolence (chosen word) - while not approaching that of the Middle Ages - has a sickening effect even for us baby boomers who hand on by fingernails thanks to the Eucharist and/or our own good pastors or parishes - like oases in the desert - but the lack of nurture is parching us daily and , one day, many of us will shrivel and blow away. No grat loss for all, perhsp, but still a pervasive dust bowl of what once was a fertile community.
It's a bit off-topic, but how much of a staff does a disgraced 80 year old Cardinal need?
Crime and sin of this magnitude can only continue with BIG money behind it, enough money to silence critics and media outlets, enough money to tempt princes of the Church to support and defend monsters like Law so they can keep their plump, cushy lifestyles rolling along.
Given this level of moral vacancy, it makes sense now why these Vatican executives might go after people like the nuns, who not only don't support extravagent lifestyles and sinecures for monsters, but who might, in ernest piety, expose the depravity of their superiors. Going after the whistle-blowers is a time-honored tradition that Law and his crew, perhaps incuding Pope Benedict, have finally resorted to. Very sad.
I just hope nobody is fooled by this charade. Now I'm going to go wash my hands. This story made me feel sick and grimy.
Cardinal Dolan was interviewed by Chris Jansing on MSNBC and he said:
“Keep in mind, too, Chris, that some of the people that were worried about some of the stances of the LCWR were women religious who have been writing to the Vatican saying: ‘We are a little worried about the drift of this organization.’”
I am assuming that the vast majority of women religious who wrote to the Vatican about the LCWR were members of the Council of Major Superiors of Women Religious (CMSWR), who seem to be more compatible with the USCCB and Vatican. (They wear habits.)
Mother Mary Clare Millea, who was charged by the Vatican with directing a three-year study of U.S. women religious congregations, is superior general of the Apostles of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, also has membership in CMSWR.
Archbishop Sartain’s sister is a member of the Dominican Sisters of St. Cecilia (Nashville Dominican), a traditional order that has membership in the Council of Major Superiors of Women Religious (CMSWR).
I'd like to remind participants that full and actual names are required, thanks.
-
Hard to believe ''Kathryn Benincasa'' is the poster's real name. (And hard to believe Tania is really a religious. Spelling is one clue.)
-
From alaw enforcement point of view from where I came, Law was lucky that when the allegations about his behavior came to light there was still a feeling among prosecutors to give the heirarchy a pass. If it had been today in the present climate he may be sitting safely in Rome. This is the real issue in this horrible soul-chilling scandal. No one, not even a cardinal, bishop or other high ranking religious or secular figure should be above the law. I wonder if he would be so bold if he could be extradited
When Law and associates were exposed in Boston in 2002-3, the attitude of law enforcement, specifically the Mass. Attorney General, was anything but to give them a pass. The diocesan paper The Pilot reported scathing comments of the AG, including “No one is more disappointed than I and my staff that we cannot bring criminal charges against top management.” Apparently, he couldn't do it within the law at that time; I don't know if today would be different. McCormack, Law's one-time deputy for handling sexual misconduct problems, retired honorably in the eyes of the Church last year in spite of his coverup role in Boston. http://www.thebostonpilot.com/article.asp?ID=1212
@12: plenty of staff are needed to wash all of that dirty laundry!
In the prayer before the Sign of Peace as Mass, the Priest says “Look not on our sins, but on the faith of your Church.” Despite the sins, great and small, of clergy and laity, this investigation is more focused on preserving the faith. Let’s see how the reform goes. Peace be with you all.
There is certainly a charade and distraction going on here, but it is how Cardinal Bernard Law has been dragged into this story by the Tablet (and now America), undoubtedly to discredit the investigation and to divert attention from the real basis behind the LCWR investigation. The post and CNS links from Sergio Leiseca(#8) give more hard news than the Tablet did, so much for their sleuth reporting. It is not hard to see that sisters and nuns attending conferences organized by the LCWR would complain about some of the heterodoxy coming from the podium. But even the Tablet article connects the events more to Bishops Levada and Lori. All we get on Cardinal Law is that he has been a supporter of Bishop Lori and conservative nuns, and was involved in other investigations unrelated to this one, hardly a connection at all. But, at least on this site, almost all the negative comments are directed to Cardinal Law (mentioned 18 times in 30 comment posts!). So, I guess the distraction worked like a charm.
In the prayer before the Sign of Peace as Mass, the Priest says “Look not on our sins, but on the faith of your Church.” Despite the sins, great and small, of clergy and laity, this investigation is more focused on preserving the faith. Let’s see how the reform goes. Peace be with you all.
Sometimes I feel like I should high-tail it out of the church. And I read the recent column by Father Martin exhorting those of us who may be dissaffected to stay in. We are baptized Catholics, after all. I would go one further in an effort to give massive indigestion to the good old boys — I would like to call all the dissaffected Catholics back into the church. We need to raise some holy hell. Come on. It'll be fun!
*Just a completely off topic note: Tennessee Williams was baptised into the Catholic church in Key West, Florida.
Here is a quote from Ms. Hubbard’s own website: “It has become obvious that a creative minority of humanity is undergoing a profound inner mutation or transformation. Evolutionary ideas are not only serving to make sense of this change, but also acting to catalyze the potential within us to transform. (Thought creates; specific thought creates specifically)... All great spiritual paths lead us to this threshold of our own consciousness, but none can guide us across the great divide — from the creature human to the co-creative human. None can guide us in managing the vast new powers given us by science and technology. None of us have been there yet.” You can also buy a 12-week course on “The Agents of Conscious Evolution (ACE).” Doesn’t this sound like her namesake, L. Ron Hubbard’s scientology? And the top of her ‘recommended reading list’ is Deepak Chopra!
Also from Sister Schneiders' book Beyond Patching: Faith and Feminism in the Catholic Church. ''Since 1978, women have come to realize that we are not talking about how to organize the institution. We are talking about whether the God of Judeo-Christian revelation is true God or just men-writ-large to legitimate their domination; whether Jesus, an historical male, is or can be messiah and saviour for those who are not male; whether what the church has called sacraments are really encounters with Christ, or tools of male ritual abuse of women; whether what we have called church is a community of salvation or simply a male power structure.” No God the Father? Jesus a Savior only for men? Sacraments as tools of abuse?
But the LCWR is supposed to advance the Catholic evangelical mission. Mendacity might be the right word for this subterfuge.
I am also unconvinced by the rather contrived meme that the investigation of LCWR was undertaken when the Vatican got frantic calls from some poor, devout, "simple faithful" sisters who were scandalized by something they heard at an LCWR conference. I suspect any major superior who thinks she would be scandalized by kookiness can easily find a reason to send a proxy. Any major superior who chooses to attend probably has a pretty clear idea what she's getting herself into.
It also seems very probable that Sister Schneiders' book does not contain anything theologically objectionable from the preposterous distortions the radical masculinists find it necessary to sink to in their efforts to smear her. She did not assert, of course, that there is no God the Father or that Christ is only a savior for men. She is merely summarizing some questions that have arisen in academic literature. Like, duh, when Aquinas lists all the objections to each thesis in order to refute them.
Your post seems focused on trying to create outrage, and justify the CDF’s actions.
With respect to the suggestion that Sr. Schneider is heterodox based upon what you present is an excerpt from her book. Unless you have read the book, and can safely represents its complete context, then I'm not sure much is to be gained. Using an excerpt to illustrate the whole, synecdoche reasoning, can be disingenuous. And my experience with those that seek to police orthodoxy is that they tend to be incredibly dishonest in selecting such matters. And they have a Pharisaic mindset.
When I google Sr. Schneider, I've located this interview from 2009 - http://ncronline.org/news/women/weve-given-birth-new-form-religious-life
Some selected excerpts:
But I think if we believe in what we are doing (and I definitely do) we just have to be peacefully about our business, which is announcing the Gospel of Jesus Christ, fostering the Reign of God in this world.
We are as different from "apostolic Religious Congregations” [such as those represented by the Council of Major Superiors of Women Religious, or CMSWR] (of whom the Vatican is much more approving) as the mendicants were from the Benedictine monks. The big difference is that they Perfectae Caritatis and did what it asked: deepened their spirituality (I hope), and did some updating - shorter habits, a more flexible schedule, dropping customs that were merely weird, etc. We read Perfectae Caritatis through the lenses of Gaudium et Spes and Lumen Gentium and we were called out of the monastic/apostolic mode and into the world that Gaudium et Spes declared the Church was embracing after centuries of world rejection.
Reading the totality of her interviews that I could find through Google, I cannot find the cause of condemnation as self-evident as you do
Regarding Hubbard, of course, it is fine for sisters to read anything they want, on their own time, such as Dianetics or anything from Carl Sagan or Deepak Chopra. But, what is the mission of the LCWR? Surely, it is not to explore fringe and kooky ideas that are implicitly or explicitly anti-Catholic? It is certainly not helping vocations, with their precipitous drop in the last 40 years. Maybe, they should look for advice to their sister organization, the Council of Major Superiors of Women Religious (CMSWR), which although representing only 20% of the women religious today, accounts for the vast majority of new vocations.
Rick #35
I have not bought or read the works of Sr. Schneiders and am still looking further for her opinions on the internet, given the quote I found. Maybe Amy is right and she, like St. Thomas, raises these heterodox ideas just to swat them down. But, given the multi-year investigation by the CDF, and the report itself, I strongly doubt that is the case.
Any Catholic who reads the 8-page report with an open mind should at least question the focus of the LCWR. For example, they mention the talk from Sr. Laurie Brink (moving beyond the Church or beyond Jesus); protests on Church teaching on women priests and homosexuality, “placing themselves outside the Church”, and certain “radical feminist themes” that “risk distorting faith in Jesus and his loving Father…or even undermine the revealed doctrines of the Holy Trinity, the divinity of Christ, and the inspiration of Sacred Scripture.”
While I am still wading through some of the past documents, in the 2010 LCWR Presidential Address, by Marlene Weisenbeck, FSPA, I read this on page 2 “Like a certain nameless pastor who declared that authority in the church “doesn’t rely on a formal imposition of hands, but rather a divine imperative from the heart”, we can say also that hope is an imperative of the heart.” What about apostolic succession and the sacrament of holy orders? I agree with you that no single quote alone tells the whole story. I suppose that is why the investigation took several years. Again, I hope the reform will bear fruit.