Cardinal Rodé, U.S. nuns & the F-word (UPDATE)
One of the reasons the Vatican decided to launch an investigation of U.S. women religious? Feminism. Tablet Rome correspondent Robert Mickens reports:
The official that initiated the Vatican’s investigation of women religious in the United States admitted this week that the enquiry was fueled by concerns that American nuns had become overly secularized and influenced by feminism.
Cardinal Franc Rodé told Vatican Radio on Wednesday that his office decided to launch the investigation — officially called an apostolic visitation — after hearing “critical voices from the United States”. The cardinal, who is prefect of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, indicated that “an important representative of the Church in the United States” was among the critics.
He said the representative — whose identity was not revealed — had “alerted” him “to some irregularities or deficiencies” in the way the religious sisters were living. “Above all, you could speak of a certain secularist mentality that has spread among these religious families, perhaps even a certain ‘feminist’ spirit,” the cardinal said.
Cardinal Rodé’s comments, which were given in an Italian radio interview, were sharper than a more carefully written English-language statement he issued a day earlier as a response to the “many news reports” that have criticized the Vatican visitation. In that text he never mentioned secularism or feminism. He said the purpose of the investigation was to “to identify the signs of hope, as well as concerns, within religious congregations in the United States”.
Cardinal Rodé on Wednesday said the final decision to hold an apostolic visitation was taken in September 2008 during a symposium on religious life at Stonehill College in Easton, Massachusetts. Nearly 600 people attended that event, including some bishops, priests, lay people and religious. Many of the speakers were critical of develops that have appeared in religious orders in the forty some years since the Second Vatican Council. [NCR reported on the event here.]
“There a desire was expressed to look for a remedy to this situation [of women's religious life], which many say is is not as good as that of past decades,” the cardinal said in this week’s interview.
UPDATE: In his diocesan paper, Rockville Centre Bishop William Murphy wrote about the visitation:
The first I knew of such a visitation was when the announcement was made last spring that Mother Clare Millea, Superior General of the Apostles of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, was named to conduct a visitation on the quality of life of congregations of women religious in apostolic life. At the meeting of the bishops in San Antonio in June, Mother Clare spoke to the bishops and outlined the three-step process she and her colleagues would be following. This and all other information can be found on their Web site, www.apostolicvisitation.org. She made it clear that the visitation would be conducted by sisters under her leadership and that, while we bishops will be asked our opinion at some point in the process, the whole project was outside the hands of the U.S. bishops.
on November 5th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
For purposes of understanding the Cardinal’s comments, we may assume, I’d think, that “feminism” is shorthand for “supporting the ordination of women, and supporting abortion rights”.
on November 5th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
The cardinal… indicated that “an important representative of the Church in the United States” was among the critics.
So it’s true: he was responding to Maureen Dowd!
on November 5th, 2009 at 1:24 pm
I don’t pretend to understand all of the dimensions of the apostolic visitation issue, but if the Tablet story and the linked NCR story are correct, it seems Rome is undertaking a sweeping inquiry to ferret out progressives, even though one member of the ITC admits these “polarizing” nuns are a minority among consecrated women:
“Missionary Servant of the Most Blessed Trinity Sr. Sara Butler, a member of the International Theological Commission and professor of Dogmatic Theology at St. Joseph’s Seminary (Dunwoodie), told the audience that increasingly progressive leadership of religious orders threatens the Catholic character of the orders and is polarizing those in religious life. She said this is occurring despite the fact that the vast majority of consecrated religious are not progressive or even in progressive orders.
‘The problem is not only that so few are joining our ranks,’ Butler said. ‘It is that the current polarization and division in the church at large is found among us as well. It exists in the uneasy and even fractured relationships among our apostolic institutes, within many of our institutes, and — for many — in the relationships of religious with the diocesan clergy, the bishops and the Holy See.’
Butler said that the ‘reality of this polarization is more than regrettable; it is a cause of scandal and continues abetted by bishops unwilling to confront progressive religious.’”
If, for the sake of argument, there are some “progressive” nuns or orders that need visitation, why is Rome casting its net so widely, especially given the negative impact the visitation seems to be having in general on the morale of many consecrated women?
And let the betting begin on the identity of the “important representative of the Church in the United States”?
on November 5th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
For “important” read “self-important”.
on November 5th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
It seems obvious enough that the non-traditional orders of nuns are Not attracting new members, while the more traditional orders are in fact attracting new members
Ironically some older orders that went non-traditional after Vatican II are in fact fading, as their sisters pass away and so few young women join their ranks. As interesting is that several newer orders that are more traditional (nun wearing habits, living and praying in common etc.) are in fact attracting new members and their small communities are growing and thriving.
And so of course the Vatican would like to have a closer look at this situation. I do not see any sort of ‘driving out of progressives’ here (“Me thinks thou dost protest too much”). It is very reasonable for the Vatican to want to know what works and what does not and obviously, an in-person visitation is better than trying to figure out what is happening from afar.
As for “feminism” (as defined above), Catholic nuns have no reason to be sowing discord by “supporting the ordination of women priests” and they absolutely should not “support abortion rights”. The pope and the Magisterium will decide if the Roman Catholic Church will allow women priests, thank you very much. And above all things, abortion is not a right; it is murder and it is an abomination. Really, what sort of language is that anyway – “abortion rights”?
As for any outrage that the Vatican would dare want to have a better idea of what American sister are doing and what the status of their organization is, while those who are outraged may like the high-drama, for the most part, most laity who understand anything about the matter, understand that this visitation is reasonable.
on November 5th, 2009 at 2:34 pm
I guess I’d suggest that if the Vatican really wanted to target individuals, it would do so. We’ve seen it many times over the years.
on November 5th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
As for “feminism” (as defined above)…
That is not a valid definition of feminism. Regardless of what Cardinal Rode thinks “feminism” means.
on November 5th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
That’s right, Ken. These uppity women need to learn to be good little obedient little girls, silent, cloistered, ensconced in burquas and absolutely prepared to listen to their male betters in any and all matters. After all, ordination brings moral and intellectual superiority ipso facto, so the girls should just shut up, pray and obey.
And you wonder why thoughtful women are abandoning the church and religious orders? Of course, there will always be those who WANT to be good little obedient, silent, cloistered (can we call them women? sounds a bit secularist-feminist to me), ensconced in burquas and who will ALWAYS listen to their male betters.
on November 5th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
I see NCR is reporting the California Bishops have written a letter in support of the nuns.
Sr. Butler is speaking out of (scarcely populated) Dunwoodie, not known for being a center of intellectual ferver as it was in former days. In fact, I’m told that the Rector was urging young men interested in priesthood to betakethemselves to Steubenvile or Ave Maria in prep.
There it seems loyalty to Rome(Romanita) is the point.And perhaps the good Sister should self examine on role in polarization.
And the Cardinal expresses the Roman curial view that is anti-progressive, as Bill C. points out.So now we define feminism as abortion -which we’ll agree on -and women’s ordination which Ken bows down to Rome on and worships but many question.
But that’s a simple minded definition of feminism and again betrays the distanced views that really wants no questions.
So what good does the Cradinal hope to accomplish by his remarks beyond preaching to his choir?
on November 5th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
after hearing “critical voices from the United States”. Says Rode’
The ‘trads’ a minority, spend time,energy and money as “critical voices from the United States”. and it’s a fact that they have places/persons in the Vatican to REPORT all that they deem evil.
Maybe an ironing board set up in every parish giving parishioners an opportunity to sign a ‘thank you’ to all the teaching and pastoral sisters in their lives . might mitigate the enormous Trad complaints to Rome.
on November 5th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
The Beguines were historically looked at askance from Rome. Their orthodoxy was frequently investigated, challenged and tried. They had little defense from institutions within the Church. Yet from the Beguines emerged forms of piety such as daily Eucharist (not common at the time) and adoration that we associate now with traditional forms of piety. Meaningful reform, to say nothing of profound mysticism, has emerged from groups and associations such as the Beguines which sprung up organically in response to some of the political uncertainty of the time.
I hope (but doubt) that the visitation is looking for the movement of the Spirit in many forms of spirituality currently emerging from some of these communities’ particularly those not immediately perceived as orthodox. I am thinking of eco-spiritualities, gender neutral descriptions of the deity, gospel reflections from women, women and earth centered spirituality.
I have been enriched by some of these forms and I am grateful that there are places where “experiments” around prayer, meditation and contemplation can occur in a spirit of freedom and openness.
Cardinal Rodé’s comments suggest a contrary spirit and validate the concerns of religious such as Sr. Schneider’s. This should in no way be perceived as a witch hunt. Based on Cardianl Rode’s comments not only is it going to be perceived as a witch hunt. It literally IS a witch hunt. He should immediately be replaced and the commission should be headed by a sister from Rome who, with her committee, should be responsible for the development, structure, delivery, and analysis of the report.
on November 5th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
“It seems obvious enough that the non-traditional orders of nuns are Not attracting new members, while the more traditional orders are in fact attracting new members”
Since it’s time for stating the obvious, I’ll say what’s obvious to me. I think it’s obvious that a large number of recruits to the more rigidly traditional orders, though certainly not all, seek out a traditional religious order as an escape given their inability to cope with people who have different views and lifestyles from their own in a mature way. I’m afraid that quality is at least as important as quantity in measuring up religious orders.
on November 5th, 2009 at 4:01 pm
Jimmy Mac; do you not think it is worth the Vatican’s time to conduct a visitations regarding these communities? Do you not think the Vatican should do this?
Hmm, let’s review. Imagine for a moment that you are sitting in Rome and look across the Atlantic and see that in the US, there are various religious communities of nuns that used to be quite large, and after Vatican II, they dropped wearing the habit, no longer live and pray in common, and who tend to bristle under their vow of obedience, and you also notice that this group of orders is not attracting new members and in fact, the average age is over 70 and climbing; their numbers are shrinking and their communities are fading.
From your Mediterranean vantage point you also notice, that the US also has some newer, more traditional (orthodox if you like) orders of nuns who embrace wearing a habit, who live and pray in community and who, via the Magisterium, are obedient to Rome. Further, you note that they are attracting quite a few new members; their numbers are growing and their communities are thriving.
Again, if you are in Rome – many thousands of miles from the USA – what would you think?
Before jumping to any conclusions regarding this evidence, the most reasonable thing is to conduct the very sort of visitation the Vatican has planned.
on November 5th, 2009 at 4:10 pm
Remember MEP – Judge not, lest you be judged. ; )
The charge you level at traditional orders of nuns is strong, but it is straighforward enough. With it in mind then; what in your opinion, if anything, should be done about these nuns with this “inability to cope with people who have different views and lifestyles from their own”.
For those who oppose this visitation, when it comes to religious orders; is there ever a reason anyone you would dare involve the Vatican?
on November 5th, 2009 at 4:34 pm
Ken,
The boys in the Vatican don’t have to look across the pond. They only have to look out their back door. The situation is no different in any of the EU countries.
So why the USA? It is certainly no different in Canada. So why not Canada?
I’d say it goes back to those “important representative” American choir boys.
American nuns sir, have been had and you dare to support their interrogation.
71 years ago in Germany and Austria, Nov. 9 and 10, 1938, was Kristallnacht, when hundreds of synagogues were set afire, Jewish businesses looted, Jewish schools destroyed, Jewish cemeteries desecrated and 91 Jews slain– among the first of the six million to come. Kristallnacht began after Herschel Grynszpan, 17, a Paris student who was angry at the way his family was being treated in Germany, assassinated a German diplomat. Grynszpan said he did it because: “It is not, after all, a crime to be Jewish. I am not a dog.”
It is a long way from Kristallnacht but nuns are not dogs either, even ones who think women should be ordained and that abortion may not be as simple as it is portrayed by the Church in all instances. Jimmy Mac catches the spirit of what is wrong with this investigation.
The minds at work on both sides 71 years ago are no different than the minds on the two sides in this dispute.
on November 5th, 2009 at 4:34 pm
Imagine for a moment that you are sitting in Rome and look across the Atlantic and see that in the US, there are various religious communities of nuns that used to be quite large, and after Vatican II, they dropped wearing the habit, no longer live and pray in common, and who tend to bristle under their vow of obedience, and you also notice that this group of orders is not attracting new members and in fact, the average age is over 70 and climbing; their numbers are shrinking and their communities are fading.
Have you forgotten that size doesn’t matter? :) I’d hope the bootm line would not be recruting large numbers of warm bodies but how well the order’s members act out their love for God and their neighbors.
I don’t think feminism is necessrily about women’s ordination or pro-choice-ness. I think it’s about self-respect, equality of opportunity, and the chance to discern decisions as moral agents …. all of which must scare the Vatican silly.
on November 5th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
Congratulations to Robert Mickens for ferreting out the real reasons for Rode’s investigation: never mind the spin about “concern” for religious women, when his version of “feminism” is the heart of the matter. Just reading about Stonehill was chilling.
All I can say is, thank God!, my daughter did not stay, and she shares the view.
Yes, all those uppity adult educated women need to relearn obedience, not in the form of intense listening for God’s will, but jumping as high as Rome wants. It is the sisters who joined us demonstrating at the cathedral for bishop accountability. How dangerous can you get.
Rode is of a prior age, with nostalgia for a world he hopes to recreate. Sad for him, and tragic for countless women religious.
on November 5th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
Somebody apparently edited my comment, which raised the issue of the general mental health of the pool of recruits to the self-described traditional orders. Hence the context was removed and others got the impression that I was judging the nuns. If that is a taboo subject then please feel free to delete my comments. However, it is the responsibility of each order to ensure the fitness of their candidates for religious life and psychological examinations are a standard part of this. The possibility that some groups are not getting the job done is, I think, in much more pressing need of investigation than the possibility of vague secular and feminist influences.
on November 5th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
Oh please calm down John – Nazis?
Like I said, for those who for whatever reason cannot bear the thought of Rome interfereng with American Catholics, the hyperbole and the high drama is probably lots of fun.
However for most laity and religious for that matter, people who actually operate in the real world and who are aware of this matter and have some understanding of it, it is clear the Vatican is – as usual – is being quite reasonable.
on November 5th, 2009 at 5:13 pm
I think there is more to MEP’s point, and I want to understand it.
Australian Bishop Geoffrey Robinson alluded to as much when he launched his book “Confronting Sex and Power in the Catholic Church” in 2007. He said,
“I feel that the major differences … are not religious or theological, but psychological. For reasons in their background and upbringing or within their personality, many people need certainties. In a world in which, as Alvin Toffler still teaches us, change is the only constant, this need can be profound. I may argue with a person’s theology, but I cannot argue with their psychological needs. Surely the answer has to lie in dialogue and mutual respect, and we have a long way to go.”
I do not exempt myself from such examination, trying to discern what are the psychological factors at play in my spiritual life. To pretend there are none is blindness. This is a sensitive subject, but one that interests me greatly.
I’ve seen articles in Commonweal about the characteristics of seminarians and concerns about their psychological background by Rev. Paul Stanosz in Oct 05 and Dec 06 (sorry do not have links). Both men and women are affected.
on November 5th, 2009 at 5:15 pm
Ken, do us all a favor -you are entitled to your view, but don’t (circularly) equate it with thosde who operate in”the real world.”
Your “real world” as other views show here, is quite circumscribed and your viewpoint narrow.
As I said, Rode is preaching to his choir, with little insight of modernity and feminism.
on November 5th, 2009 at 5:30 pm
Hello. Welcome to my thread. Do you find yourself being unnecessarily provocative, snarky, or generally rude in your comment-writing? Why not take a breather? Come back when you’ve found your way back to civility.
on November 5th, 2009 at 7:24 pm
John Borst has it right. The Vatican has some core right wing here who make them sound more important than they are. Europe is no better but the Vatican does not dare criticize there since they know they will be embarrassed.
For the life of me I cannot fathom those who think the modern clerical seminarian is any better. I get the opportunity to watch them very closely and they are just as self centered as the clergy we are accustomed to seeing.
And remember Sara Butler wrote that totally sensible book about women’s ordination with the marvelous conclusion that Jesus did not choose any women to be Apostles….
on November 5th, 2009 at 9:09 pm
One person’s “real world” is another person’s Disney Land, or at least that his been my observation.
This I would say about Cardinal Rode. The more he says, the more you see where he is coming from, and he is not slow to speak. His evaluation of V2 is quite revealing. The question that comes to my mind is this: Who thought he was the one fitted to hold the position in the Vatican bureaucracy that he now holds? Do think about this.
on November 5th, 2009 at 10:02 pm
Cardinal Rode’, named prefect by Pope John Paul II in February 2004, turned 75 in September but will likely be given the usual cardinal’s one to three years’ honors lap before his resignation is accepted.
About ten “traditional” communities in the US accept fifteen or twenty novices each year. Almost all of these communities have less than 250/300 professed members. In the early 1960s at the very least forty non-cloistered US women’s communities were receiving about 100 novices every year, and an equal number, again at least, between fifty and seventy-five novices annually, The present-day traditional communities will never bring us remotely close to the 185,000 Sisters in this country in 1965. They tend to serve mostly in schools, but they will never re-staff by a long shot the Catholic school system of the past. To say nothing of hospitals, child-care institutions, homes for the elderly, social service among people in great need, catechists. We will never see them, for instance, staffing US government, yes government, institutions such as the dozens of Daughters of Charity who were the nurses at the US Leprosy Hospitasl in Carville, Louisiana for over a century and the nurses at The US Soldiers’ Home in Washington for most of the last century. In terms of the overall Catholic population, the “traditional” communities are attracting a minuscule number of young women as compared to the great communities that built the Church in this country. We were spoiled, and the bishops short-sightedly thought it would go on forever. Many of the great communities may be dying out, but oh how they worked, and continue to serve, many in areas of great poverty, even into their 80s, at times 90s.
From my experience of Italy, there too a great decline of women religious, almost all in habits, has set in. What keeps the communities going for now is bringing Sisters from Asia and Africa where the Italian missionary Sisters established novitiates fifty, seventy years ago.
on November 5th, 2009 at 10:12 pm
“Kristallnacht began after Herschel Grynszpan, 17, a Paris student who was angry at the way his family was being treated in Germany, assassinated a German diplomat. Grynszpan said he did it because: “It is not, after all, a crime to be Jewish. I am not a dog.””
Are you making some kind of sick ironic comment given the tragedy at Ft. Hood or do you find this filth humorous? Either way, I think you need to do some Eucharistic Adoration or something because if you think that is expressive of some sort of Catholic sentiment, you are practicing a different religion than most of the rest of us are familiar with.
on November 5th, 2009 at 10:18 pm
Hello Joseph (and All),
“The more he says, the more you see where he is coming from, and he is not slow to speak. His evaluation of V2 is quite revealing.”
I took a look at the NCR report to which Grant linked us. I would agree with you that Cardinal Rode’s evaluation of VII is revealing. But I don’t think it’s at all surprising (and you did not suggest it is surprising). Indeed, I would have been surprised had his eminence used any words other than “hermeneutic of discontinuity” and such similar phrases that have become stock among the active bishops. Nearly all of the currently serving bishops is the world were selected by John Paul II, with the help of certain advisors he trusted. And he took great care to select as bishops men who agreed with him on a great many matters of substance. Indeed, I can’t think of any example of a John Paul II bishop ever disagreeing with John Paul II about anything. I think I’m safe in thinking that Cardinal Rode is a John Paul II bishop (though Grant can correct me if I am wrong). Now of course the actual words “hermeneutic of continuity” (supposedly the “right” interpretation of VII) and “hermeneutic of discontinuity” (supposedly the “wrong” interpretation) are attirbuted to now Pope Benedict XVI, though I believed he first presented these phases while he was still Cardinal Ratzinger. But I don’t think that the current Holy Father’s views regarding VII differ in the slightest from those of his predecesor.
I have to admit I find it striking that not only do the John Paul II bishops seem to me so uniform in their thinking, but I seldom find them expressing their views in their own words. I guess I should admit what I have been hinting at here – I’m taking a rather critical attitude towards the JP II bishops, though I’ll do my best not to disobey them on matters of faith and morals.
on November 5th, 2009 at 10:33 pm
Some complain about Pius XII but he seems, to judge from VII, to have appointed bishops capable of thinking for themselves and in the best sense also thinking with the church.
on November 6th, 2009 at 12:22 am
Ken,
I took the section on Kristallnacht from a report on “an extraordinary speech by Supreme Court of Canada Justice Rosalie Abella, herself a daughter of Holocaust survivors” in a news paper report “Abella’s message: Stand up for justice”.
http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Abella+message+Stand+justice/2182355/story.html
I wasn’t laying a charge of Nazi behaviour, I was trying to compare a type of mind that is at play which I believe is currently at play both within society and within the Church. The authoritarianism within Catholicism has too often been linked with the secular authoritarianism of Catholic leaders. Franco in Spain is one prime example.
What you didn’t do is answer the other question ie: Why only the USA, why not Italy, or Britain or Australia to add to Canada.
MAT: Get a grip (sorry Grant). I hadn’t even heard about the incident at Ft. Hood until I read your comment and Googled it. As to attacking the worthiness of my Catholicity, please you do me and yourself a disservice.
on November 6th, 2009 at 10:24 am
Thanks for the explanation John; I think I understand what you mean. I still doubt it necessary to invoke memories of Jews being slaughtered wholesale by Nazi in discussing a visitation by the Vatican to religious orders in the US. I do not see the comparison. And while it is true Franco was an authoritarian fascist, neither he nor Spain was connected with slaughtering Jews.
I guess I would have been more careful with my metaphors.
As for authoritarianism, of course the Vatican has authority over religious orders; it has authority over the entire Church.
My wife is a neo-catechumenado (that group is big in Latin America, but small up here), and while back Pope Benedict issued a directive that had bearing on neo-catechumenado groups and masses said specifically for them. Apparently the group had drifted a bit from church norms, or the norms were not clear, and the Pope’s directive had something to do with reminding the laity that they are to make the bread for the hosts and to not crowd the priest when gathering in the sacristy.
Neo-Catechumenados around the world of course accepted his authority and they now make the bread (for the hosts) in accord with Church rules, and they stand clear of the altar while the priest is offering mass.
The upshot is that Catholic religious orders (and all Catholic groups) are to be obedient to the Church, and as long as they claim to be acting in the name of the Catholic Church, Rome has ultimate authority over them. This is not unreasonable; in fact it is natural.
As for why the Vatican chose to visit nuns in the US, I do not know. Obviously they are interested in the status of religious orders in English-speaking countries. I imagine they could have just as easily chosen Canada or Australia or another English-speaking country. The problem they are looking into is real, and it is reasonable for the Pope to want to have a better understanding of it. He chose to do so by sending emissaries from the Vatican.
Rather than immediately attributing various dark motives to their choice as you seem to do, I tend to give the Vatican the benefit of the doubt. They are not calling for a holocaust or a witch hunt. They are simply looking into a matter of some import, and from all appearances, they are doing it in a reasonable manner.
on November 6th, 2009 at 10:28 am
Typo Alert – I should have typed “…directive had something to do with reminding the laity (how) they are to make the bread for the hosts…”
on November 6th, 2009 at 11:38 am
Add my name to the long list of Catholics who applaud Sister X and others who dare to speak against the Red Hat Society in Rome. As we all tip toe around the egregious Apol.Vis- no one seems to want to address the “P’ word. P is for Pedophile. Or the “L” word – as in Law-suits.
when do the ‘boys’ get a visit from “on the Rode Again”?
I saw a great New Yorker cartoon about a pope snatching the purse of an elderly nun – or did I make that up?
on November 6th, 2009 at 11:41 am
So Dunwoodie is not thriving? I remember hearing that name as that apex of traditionalist restorationism. Yet we are told that there is an ardent younger generation embracing traditional priesthood and sisterhood in growing numbers. Ken has put this view forward as regards sisters.
Ken also wrote: “Imagine for a moment that you are sitting in Rome and look across the Atlantic and see that in the US, there are various religious communities of nuns that used to be quite large, and after Vatican II, they dropped wearing the habit, no longer live and pray in common, and who tend to bristle under their vow of obedience, and you also notice that this group of orders is not attracting new members and in fact, the average age is over 70 and climbing; their numbers are shrinking and their communities are fading.”
If this is so, why bother investigating them at all? Why would you bother elderly women with the fuss and bother of a bureaucratic check-up? Especially if a younger more “orthodox” (a word that has now become hateful) generation is supplying replacements?
on November 6th, 2009 at 11:42 am
I would add the I word. Inquisition. and the W word. witch-hunt. Old habits die hard, even when there is no one to apply them to except pious elderly consecrated women.
on November 6th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
Fr. O Leary, I do not understand why you or others are so upset about the Vatican wanting to have a better understanding of this situation.
This is an important matter. Nuns have played a big part in the history of the Church and they still do very important, very needed work. They are still very much appreciated, and very much needed.
This world is a big place and without travel, it is difficult to get a realistic feel for what is going on in another country across the ocean, thousands of miles away. Accordingly, in order to better understand what is happening in one corner of the world – in the USA in this case – it natural enough that the Pope would send his emissaries to have a look, talk with people, study the matter and finally, report back to him with their findings. It seems a very normal, very reasonable course of action to take.
Why the upset? Why the drama?
on November 6th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
There are many ways to approach the problems, but how open are the investigators to understandings that are different from theirs?
For instance, let’s follow Ken’s imagination:
Imagine for a moment that you are sitting in Rome and look across the Atlantic and see that in the US, there are various religious communities of nuns that used to be quite large, and after Vatican II, they dropped wearing the habit, no longer live and pray in common, and who tend to bristle under their vow of obedience,
This seems to echo the priest shortage.
Is this “bristling” new? Does it reflect a deeper understanding of obedience?
and you also notice that this group of orders is not attracting new members and in fact, the average age is over 70 and climbing; their numbers are shrinking and their communities are fading.
How does average age correlate with the lay population, who are living longer?
Are older women joining, perhaps after being widowed or separated? How is this paradigm being explored? (The Visitation Sisters were founded by the widowed St Jane de Chantal, so this is not entirely new)
From your Mediterranean vantage point you also notice, that the US also has some newer, more traditional (orthodox if you like) orders of nuns who embrace wearing a habit, who live and pray in community and who, via the Magisterium, are obedient to Rome. Further, you note that they are attracting quite a few new members; their numbers are growing and their communities are thriving.
I recall some figures that suggested if there were 3 moderate, 1 conservative and 1 liberal priests per bunch, there is now 1 conservative per same sized bunch. Could the same kind of scale apply here, suggesting the “thriving” traditional communities are still attracting the conservatives, but liberal and moderate Catholics have been alienated?
What about communities that are “more Catholic than the Pope”? Mother Angelica for example had problems with the Magisterium in the person of Cardinal Mahony, which I assume exempts her from Ken’s description of those “who, via the Magisterium, are obedient to Rome.” Does she fit better with those “who tend to bristle under their vow of obedience”? Does “obedience” or “traditional” really correlate with success, or is it another factor?
I am hopeful that the visitation will reveal some great things about what has been happening in this contry. It may be a silly hope, but hope is always good.
on November 6th, 2009 at 2:22 pm
“MAT: Get a grip (sorry Grant). I hadn’t even heard about the incident at Ft. Hood until I read your comment and Googled it. As to attacking the worthiness of my Catholicity, please you do me and yourself a disservice.”
I did not say anything about the worthiness of your Catholicity. What I said was that your advocacy that these nuns murder Vatican representatives did not represent a Catholic sentiment most people are familiar with and I advocated prayer. How does prayer do anyone a disservice?
on November 6th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
Nobody advocated murdering anyone, and this is really getting out of hand. One more warning for everybody: if you have a comment on Cardinal Rode’s remarks, share it. Otherwise please refrain.
on November 6th, 2009 at 6:43 pm
This week, Cardinal Rode is trying to do damage control on his handling of the Visitation. His 2008 speech at Stonehill, (which deserves to be read in full detail, see below.), showed the degree to which his mind was made up about what he expected to find in this “inquiry.’ He came prepared last year with the judgment that “all is not well with religious life in America,” (4) especially in active religious orders. Marked out for special criticism was a group he described as “ those who have opted for ways that take them outside communion with Christ in the Catholic Church, although they themselves may have opted to “stay” in the Church physically. These may be individuals or groups in institutes that have a different view or they may be entire communities” (5). The subsequent advice he offers on reform is not even aimed at this group, as he seems to have written them off completely. If there are such people, one might understand his concern. But given his more recent remarks one wonders whether his judgment is to be trusted.
This week Cardinal Rode offers some clarifications about what actually brought him to Stonehill : an alert from “an important representative of the Church in the United States” “to some irregularities or deficiencies” in the way the religious sisters were living. “Above all, you could speak of a certain secularist mentality that has spread among these religious families, perhaps even a certain ‘feminist’ spirit,” said the Cardinal. If feminism is his target, he is way off base, and if vague charges of a “secularist mentality ” are his target, they are easily made, hard to prove, and suggest that Fr. O’Leary’s comment about a witch hunt may not be far off the mark.
The Cardinal has also suggested that at the Stonehill Conference he heard things from American sisters and others confirming his concerns. But the papers and presentations at Stonehill were of an extremely conservative cast. How balanced a picture of American sisters could he have found there? Find below a link to the Conference site with all the major papers. (Please read Rode’s in full, and especially Sister Sara Butler’s, to get the flavor of the occasion. She, too, didn’t need to ask any questions. She had all the answers already. She attacks the major organizations representing the leadership of women’s congregations and calls for a visitation, as for a crusade. Her speech reads like a call to action delivered at a rally.)
http://www.stonehill.edu/x14963.xml
on November 6th, 2009 at 6:52 pm
Thanks Mollie. It was a stunning claim.
on November 6th, 2009 at 9:00 pm
“Fr. O Leary, I do not understand why you or others are so upset about the Vatican wanting to have a better understanding of this situation.”
Ken, if the Vatican really had the spirit of fraternal dialogue that you ascribe to them, I know that religious sisters would be delighted. What they, and even more so Catholic lay women, have been sad about for a long time is the absence of such dialogue.
Remember Sr Theresa Kane’s public appeal to the Pope on Oct. 7, 1979. Do you think there was any response from the Vatican in the form of opening up a dialogue? Quite the contrary! She was seen as an uppity, impertinent woman, nothing more. I found this on the web, her response to the Pope’s death: “The passing of Pope John Paul II places a void in the hearts of all people of good will. John Paul II leaves a legacy of peace, dignity, justice and the common good. I had the great fortune to meet the pontiff during his visit to Washington, DC, in 1979.” (Unfortunately the rest is for subscribers.)
on November 6th, 2009 at 9:10 pm
All the movements for justice within the Church that Sr Butler evokes in such tones of distaste seem to me to be quite valid movements, or at least to be putting forward quite valid questions for discussion. So the Vatican is playing its predestined role in the polarization between opposed flanks of Catholicism, reinforced by the culture-wars climate in the USA. One would like to think that the dialogue with the sisters being investigated would lead them to a position beyond such one-sidedness.
on November 6th, 2009 at 10:08 pm
Interesting posts. As more and more material becomes known publically, it appears that there is a minority push for this “investigation” or “audit” – citing the Stonehill Conference; talks that have a minority point of view; threads suggesting pressure/requests to investigate not for positive but for negative, agenda led reasons.
- recent statements by the California bishops in support of the sisters;
- data that clearly shows 90% of all sisters are not in the “traditional” communities
- data that shows the average age of sisters is well past 70 and that the total US numbers are so far down that it is hard to see a justificable reason for this undertaking
- US bishops asked to pay for this “audit” – appears that there is an underwhelming response – funny how money speaks
- guess we can argue about numbers but he makes no mention of the other “audit” of the Leadership Conference (90%+ of all US female communities belong to this)…..so, explain why the other leadership group is not being “audited” esp. if numbers is not the criteria?
- many posts above about the traditional communities – Dr. Page eloquently cites the stats; the fact that 10 or fewer communities have had some recent vocations but the total numbers are almost insignificant (and remember that this is the total number of entering vocations; how many will take final vows?)….unknown
- as a former formation director, it was always our desire to support candidates in their emotional maturation process. That meant supporting and challenging candidates in terms of why they were choosing to be religious? My experience was that over the years, we saw more and more candidates who were confused; came for the wrong reasons; etc. This is not meant to demean or put down candidates – it merely reflects actual experience and studies completed by CARA. An honest approach to candidates (not liberal, conservative, traditional, etc.) but that they could both contribute to and benefit from a religious vocation takes hard work and many years of discernment. Sometimes, the most compassionate thing you can do is help a candidate discern that religious life is not for them.
on November 7th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
I am amazed that some here feel that the Vatican is capable doing some positive things with this visitation. Gone are the days when Ted Hespburgh could call Paul VI and get a meddling cardinal off his back. This is why I contend that most of the polarization comes from Rome. Needled, of course, by the Sara Butler’s of the world who can barely control the seminarians in her midst.
on November 9th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
I am amazed how some would simply ignore the sisters and let their orders, along with everything they have done wither on the vine.
Do you not think the Vatican should discuss the obvious large reduction in the size of the orders? Do you not think the Vatican ought to at least try to get a better understanding of this situation? Do you not value the work of these fine women who have chosen to dedicate themselves to God in this special way?
Do you think they (Vatican representatives) should all just stay in Rome and leave Americans alone? I do not understand the problem some seem to have with the Vatican daring to visit an element of the Catholic Church in America? The attitude of some seems to be “how dare they!”.
In fact, the Vatican would be guilty of negligence if it took no interest and no action but rather, just stayed in Rome and let things continue trudging along as-is, getting smaller and smaller each year until they are gone altogether.
on November 9th, 2009 at 5:28 pm
Ken, who would like to “simply ignore the sisters and let their orders, along with everything they have done wither on the vine”? This is not a simple choice between helping/paying attention to women religious in the U.S. and leaving them to rot. Similarly, one who objects to the “visitation” and doctrinal inquiry, or even just to the way the objectives have been communicated by the Vatican, is not objecting to the very idea of papal authority. The with-the-pope-or-against-the-pope framework is easy but not so useful in this discussion.
on November 9th, 2009 at 7:23 pm
Mollie – I should have been more clear. I am sure nobody wants to ignore the problems.
Instead of all the wailing and knashing of teeth on this thread about how the actions of the Vatican regarding this to date have been (which I must say I really do not see), I have not seen much by way of suggestions from folks on this thread as to what ought to be done regarding this real problem.
It is easier to snipe and complain and criticize than it is to offer constructive ideas or suggestions.
I just have not seen many real suggestions on this thread regarding how we can best help these communities.
on November 9th, 2009 at 8:11 pm
Ken, that’s because these are, at least ostensibly, comments in response to Cardinal Rode’s remarks.