The fading presence of sisters in Catholic hospitals
Today’s New York Times has an article by Kevin Sack headlined “Nuns, a ‘Dying Breed,’ Fade From Leadership Roles at Catholic Hospitals.” It probably won’t tell you much you don’t already know, but it’s a good and sensitive summary of the state of Catholic health care and its relationship to women’s religious communities. We all know about the startling decline in membership in religious orders, and the move to lay leadership (or secularization) in ministries like education and health care. But Sack’s article is also a reminder of the amazing successes of those same orders a few generations back, when they built major institutions from very modest beginnings.
The article reminded me of the exhibit Women & Spirit: Catholic Sisters in America, which I saw when it was at Ellis Island last fall (and which Cheryl Wittenauer wrote about for Commonweal). It features artifacts from the pioneer days of many religious orders whose service was focused on providing health care to the needy. I remember being moved by a page from a book of records, which is described in the NYT article as evidence of the charitable focus of the sisters’ hospital work: “The St. Louis nuns’ earliest ledgers denoted patients unable to pay as ‘Our dear Lord’s.’”
Sack writes,
Other than crucifixes on the walls and marble Madonnas in the lobby, Catholic hospitals do not look particularly different from secular ones. But their administrators say that what makes them distinct is a values-driven approach, reflected at SSM in a mission statement that pledges to use exceptional care to “reveal the healing presence of God.”
I spent a wakeful night in a hospital recently, waiting for my son to be born, and at some point I found myself looking around the room for a crucifix. It took me a moment to recognize what I was looking for, and to remind myself that I wasn’t in a Catholic hospital. At times like that, clearly, something in me is conditioned to lean on the institutional presence of the Church. I should add that I have no complaints about the care I received (and I did have a rosary handy to satisfy my need for a prayer aid). But the experience made me appreciate the importance of health care as a ministry in the Church. If crucifixes disappeared from the hospital rooms where they’re hanging now, I’d consider it a major loss.
Kevin Sack says “the number of nuns dropped precipitously, to 56,000 today from 180,000 in 1965, according to the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate at Georgetown University.”
I’ve been following claims like that for many years. In an article about the LCWR in NCR, Doris Benavides of CNS said, “Currently, there are a total of 46,451 women consecrated to religious life in the country, down from 60,642 in 2007.”
A difference of ten thousand? Every day I see obituaries of nuns. The orders I follow most closely, some large and some small, do not have 56 nuns today for every 180 they had in 1960. It’s more like 12.
Where does CARA get its figures? From bishops? Do they actually write or call every congregation? Where did the LCWR get its figures? Do they write or call every congregation?
Catholics are asked to contribute to the support of aging nuns but are not told how many there are. Will one of the results of the investigation of American nuns be credible numbers, supported by the actual names of the women religious? Priests are listed by name in the Official Catholic Directory, but sisters are not. Will Archbishop Tobin provide this information to American Catholics?
“the move to lay leadership (or secularization)”
To be a lay Catholic is not to be a secular.
I was reading the Times while sitting in a restaurant this morning with my wife. I pointed out that article to her as an example of what has become of the Times – small articles with big headlines that pretty much eliminate the need to read the article. I’m not sure my subscription to the online paper will last out the year.
We discussed what’s happened in the Church to bring about this laicisation of hospitals. I said it seemed to me that no matter what the causes – women’s movement, sexual revolution, Vatican II – the upshot is a severe individualising of the Catholic Church in America – and, probably, throughout most of the Western world. Instead of people working together in communities, they’re working individually, separated, largely isolated from one another. The nuns I’m familiar with are loners, put out into the field to direct some organization or other pretty much all by themselves. Nuns and priests both have to run around from parish to parish to try, with no hope of more than patchwork success, to fill the empty spaces left by people who are off doing their own things, perhaps here and there dedicating a piece of their lives to the Church, but mostly not. If one of the goals of the Council was to let the laity take the place of the clergy, that seems not to be happening – the laity have, in great numbers, simply left to lead their own, purely secular lives. Sacrifice and community – at least on a significantly and sufficiently large scale – are out.
1)I thought the article was the best thing in the NYT today – the Sunday Review was pretty terrible except for the editorials.
2)Based on our donations to nuns, it’s clear that our women religious are both aging but still vital and contrinuting the amazing service that they can.
3)Ann is right that lay does not mean “secular” (at least in the pejorative sense some use to blame the Church’s problems on.)
4)But,ISTM, the shift to lay leadership has meant more of a buying into the business model that I think infects our service systems and to some degre our values approach.I do not wish to say that there are not numerous wonderfiul geneerous giving lay people.
But “managing” service del;ivery may be problematic in the Ctholic tradition if the bottom line is the major value.
I don’t think we’ve come to grips with that yet.
5)Meanwhile, our women religious wh owere”visitited” are now said to be in “reconciliation” process.
Yes, it would be a sad day if we were no longer a distinct presence and voice in the care of the sick. Providence Hospital in Washington, D.C., has been able to make a go of things even while (because?) devoting themselves particularly to the care of the poor.
David Smith: I think it was William F. Buckley who, decades ago, described the typical headline on religion in the NYT as: “More Nuns Leave Convent Than Ever Before”.
I graduated from my Christian Brothers high school in 1965, and over the next few years, through various sources, heard about one after another of my former teachers leaving the order. Today, the school is “in the tradition” of the Christian Brothers, with lay teachers only. The sister school, which was run by the Sisters of Mercy, is now “sponsored” by the Sisters of Mercy. I don’t believe there are any nuns on the faculty, and the principal is man. The parish grade school I had gone to, in which most of the teachers were nuns, now doesn’t exist. My old parish and two others now run a single school.
What happened?
I join Mollie and Bob N. in lamenting the passing of the nuns from the Catholic Church. We all know what they did so well and so generously, and we’re grateful to them in ways we aren’t grateful to the priests.
Looking back at the history of the Church, perhaps the very idea of nuns — of celibate women members of orders– was a patchwork sort of solution to the sexism that prevented women from becoming priests. Maybe the demise of the women’s orders is the Holy Spirit’s way of telling the Church: it’s time to re-think and change the place of women in the Church — and that includes ordaining the would-have-been nuns!!
David N, –
One of the things that happened is that the power structure of the Church has refused to consider, to even TALK about, for God’s sake — the ordination of women. The nuns I know are bitter about that, even if they don’t want to be priests themselves. I would like to hear from any nuns on the blog about that. If there are any nuns left on the blog:-(
The continued sexism of the hierarchy (and many priests) is also a big contributing factor to the disillusionment with the leadership of the Church in the young. Ask them. I mean especially the young ones who have left the Church.
Sorry to be such a Johnny-one-note about the hierarchy, but they’re the biggest stumbling block to reform, and it doesn’t look like they have any inclination whatsoever to change. The nuns put them to shame, so the Vatican is gunning for them.
A recent article noted that across denominations, more women are leaving the church(es).
Ann’s point is relevant.
I also think it needs to be said that vII did a valuable service in helping both empower and motivate many laity to be involved in ministry. Unfortunately they operate in a coimate overwhelmed by everything is about money.
Beyond that is another big change: many don’t see nuns or clerics as “better”, just “different;” the old “higher state” argument doesn’t wash ven among many nuns who are aging.
They follow the call God gave them as each should.
Ann,
It seems to me that there has been a general exodus from the Church. Not just nuns, but brothers and priests. Not just priests and religious, but lay men and women. I don’t know how all that can be the result of the refusal to consider the ordination of women. After all, women weren’t ordained in the 1950s, or the 1850s, or the 1450s or the 450s. I don’t think people have stopped going to weekly mass (or stopped going to mass at all) because there are no women priests. I don’t think people have stopped going to confession because there are no women confessors.
To the extent that I understand the arguments against ordaining women, I think they don’t hold water. But I really don’t see how the decline in the Catholic Church, or the trend toward secularism, can be attributed to the refusal to ordain women. Are the Christian denominations that now do ordain women flourishing?
“the move to lay leadership (or secularization)”
To be a lay Catholic is not to be a secular.
Yes. You misunderstood my meaning: some Catholic institutions remain Catholic while moving to lay leadership. Others are transferred out of Church ownership altogether; thus, Catholic hospitals become secular hospitals.
As for “what happened?” I thought Sack’s thumbnail summary was a good one:
Mollie — Sorry I misread you.
(What’s that boy’s name? :-)
For somewhat related news from Kentucky:
+ Go to http://www.courier-journal.com
+ Use “Search” and enter UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL (be sure to click “Archive” button)
+ Click “Full Text (No Photo)” link to “Archbishop Joseph Kurtz defends Catholic healthcare merger with University Hospital”
Under this arrangement, Catholic Health Initiatives of Denver, CO would own 70% of the combined entity including what is now a state-owned teaching hospital in downtown Louisville.
Controversy.
(and bishop olmsted’s behavior lurks in the background)
The near extinction of nuns from American hospitals stems largely from the drastic decline of religious orders that accompanied the women’s movement, the sexual revolution, ethnic assimilation and the Second Vatican Council’s opening of the church to lay leadership.
——–
The civil rights movement more than the women’s movement. (Nuns were huge backers of the civil rights movement, and, in some cases, participlants in it.)
The sexual revolution? Yes, in that many nuns, like many priests, left to get married.
Ethnic assimilation? Never heard that one before, and I’ve read many books by former nuns. Many/most mention the dislike of being pushed around by superiors, having to work a full-time job (teaching/nursing) while being expected to spend hours at prayer, and being treated like a child.
Second Vatican Council opening the church to lay leadership? Haven’t heard that one, before, either. Of the many former religious I know and the many whose books I’ve read, I’ve never heard of one who left for that reason. Many wanted to get away from the church, not become lay leaders. (And, of course, nuns ARE laywomen. Priests often reminded sisters of that fact.)
NCR’s John Allen on the state of women religious –
“A 2009 study carried out by Georgetown’s Center of Applied Research in the Apostolate, and sponsored by the National Religious Vocations Conference, found a marked contrast between new members of religious orders in the United States today (the “millennial generation”) and the old guard. In general, younger religious, both men and women, are more likely to prize fidelity to the church and to pick a religious order on the basis of its reputation for fidelity; they’re more interested in wearing the habit, and in traditional modes of spiritual and liturgical expression; and they’re much more positively inclined toward authority.
“To gauge which way the winds are blowing, consider women’s orders. The study found that among those which belong to the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, considered the more “liberal” umbrella group, just one percent have at least ten new members; among those which belong to the Council of Major Superiors of Women Religious, seen as the more “conservative” group, a robust 28 percent have at least ten new members.
“For the most part, it’s a mistake to diagnose this trend in ideological terms, as if it’s about the politics of left vs. right. For today’s younger Catholics, it’s more a matter of generational experience. They didn’t grow up in a stuffy, all-controlling church, so they’re not rebelling against it. Instead, they’re rebelling against a rootless secular world, making them eager to embrace clear markers of identity and sources of meaning.
“Among youth, Evangelical Catholicism usually becomes ideological only if the older generation paints them into a corner, demanding that they choose sides in the church’s internal battles. That tendency, alas, seems equally pronounced on the left and the right.”
Mollie,
Were the nuns who were already nuns influenced to leave their orders by the women’s movement and the sexual revolution? I think those two social changes might explain why a declining number of women chose to enter religious orders, but my recollection of the late 1960s is not so much of a decline on young women choosing to be nuns (although that no doubt was the case) but of a fairly massive exodus of religious orders, both male and female.
One of the Christian Brothers at my high school became a close friend of my family, and he said that in his community, they had formerly had all of their time scheduled. They got up at ungodly hours to pray and had all their time taken up by those kinds of activities. He said that when those things were dropped or became optional, the brothers realized how lonely they were, and they left. Of course, that’s only one person’s take on events, and it is perhaps just one of a thousand forces that were at work.
The sexual revolution? Yes, in that many nuns, like many priests, left to get married.
Men and women got married long before the sexual revolution! Was the sexual revolution really about getting married? I think it was more about doing things other than getting married.
/Users/johnpage/Desktop/dm038xl.jpg/
Sorry. It didn’t work.
Men and women got married long before the sexual revolution! Was the sexual revolution really about getting married? I think it was more about doing things other than getting married.
—–
True that marriage existed befoe the revolution. And true that “it was more about doing things”. E.g., there was a fad in the late sixties called “the third way”. Priests and seminarians and nuns (newly out of their habits and enjoying the little freedom summer school allowed) would go dancing (like at Gaslight Square in St. Louis), go out for drinks and food, and go in for maybe a little kissing, etc. (This was a time when many priests and seminarians came out of the closet, too.) After a bit of that, some of them realized making love with a real person was more fun than talking about love/charity in the abstract, as was done in religious life.
Joseph writes (8/21 3:26 pm):
From the little I’ve seen in northern Kentucky of turning over Catholic health care to secular administrators, it’s unquestionably a step backwards, away from caring, toward penny pinching, neglect, and even abuse.
Gerelyn writes (8/21 3:28):
Funny, I don’t remember reading that in the paper paper. I see it online. Must have just read past it. I, too, have no idea what it means. Maybe they mean there are no more communities of Irish nuns running nursing homes? Puzzle.
David (8/21 3:35 pm):
Interesting. There’s also the falling-dominoes effect, I think. Once a certain number of religious left a community, 1) it probably became less able to sustain itself and 2) a sort of suction effect was probably created, drawing undecideds toward the exit.
A friend who left the convent then told me it simply didn’t make much sense being a nun when the community had been dispersed. The sense – and palpable support – of community had disappeared.
Hi Ann — His name is Martin George.
It is just amazing how we misunderstand the exodus of nuns and priests. Noitice the talented sister who led the great Catholic hospital system noted that it was a “courageous” move to choose not to recruit. The reason is the same thing cannot be found in religious life as formerly. Our longing to be in a Catholic hospital is an indication of our need to mature rather than a deficiency in service. Women became nuns when the options in society were more limited. Women became nuns when they realized they can do many things without joining religious life. What we are missing is that there are a lot more committed non-religious than there ever were. We make a big mistake when we try to evaluate Christian/Catholic effectiveness when we just look at religious life. Women (and men) are doing many more positive things than ever. It is just not under autocratic leadership anymore. The clergy and religious are not the center of Catholic life anymore.
It should be noted that the United States is not the center of the universe, notwithstanding the tendency of many to think so.
In other countries, there are much greater numbers of women religious, as well as vocations to the priesthood. Here in the D.C. area, we are blessed to have a number of these foreign-born sisters, from Mother Teresa’s Missionaries of Charity, in their distinctive white-and-blue habit/sari, to the sisters from Vietnam who came to our parish a couple weeks ago, to many, many more.
And from the video coverage I have seen, the vast numbers of young exuberant sisters at World Youth Day would suggest that if there is a problem, we need to look more to ourselves, that is, the United States, to find what is wrong.
And how can you tell from the videos that so many of them at World Youth Day are consecrated women religious? They are not ashamed to wear the habit. Having embraced the “Gospel radicalism” that Pope Benedict spoke of at WYD, these sisters are happy to be, like the Bridegroom, a sign of contradiction in the world.