I've been waiting all day to hear a statement from the Leadership Conference Women Religious (LCWR), an organization that represents 80% of the estimated 57,000 Roman Catholic women in religious orders (AKA "Nuns") in the United States.
It was supposed to have been released around 3 PM. Nothing yet. I've been praying for them all day.
You may or not be aware that these women have been under official Vatican rebuke, which came in the form of a mandate on April 18, 2012, which ordered the group to revise and place itself under the control of three U.S. bishops. official Vatican’s rebuke, which came in April 18 mandate ordering the group to revise and place itself under the control of three U.S. bishops.
The backlash of outrage and anger from American Roman Catholics has been amazing to see. It's not just about "the nuns". The Vatican's attack on the LCWR is emblematic of a growing concern that strikes at the heart of American Roman Catholics.
That concern? No, not pedophile priests. No, not the ordination of women. No, not the ability of clergy to marry. No, not even whether or not "non-Roman Catholics" can receive communion.
I'll give you a hint: It was the real spark that ignited the Reformation. No, not the divorce of King Henry the VIII. That was just the last straw.
The issue is authority.
A growing number of people in the American Roman Catholic Church - which is to say, the laity, are wrestling with the same questions Anglicans struggled with - and, in many ways, continues to be central to our church. Just how much authority does a 'foreign' (that is, not "local") body have on a community of faith and still be able to call itself "catholic" (small 'c', meaning 'universal')?
This morning, Franciscan Sr. Pat Farrell gave a rousing message to her sisters. A key question facing LCWR, she said, is “What would a prophetic response to the doctrinal assessment look like?”
“I think it would be humble, but not submissive,” she continued. “Rooted in a solid sense of ourselves, but not self-righteous; truthful, but gentle and absolutely fearless.
It would ask probing questions. Are we being invited to some appropriate pruning and are we open to it? Is this doctrinal process an expression of concern or an attempt to control?
“Concern is based in love and invites unity. Control through fear and intimidation would be an abuse of power.
“Does the institutional legitimacy of canonical recognition empower us to live prophetically? Does it allow us the freedom to question with informed consciences? Does it really welcome feedback in a church that claims to honor the sensus fildeum?”
Farrell also said that it would be a “mistake” to make “too much” of the mandate.
“We cannot allow it to consume us,” she said. “It is not the first time that a form of religious life has collided with the church, nor will it be the last.”
“The doctrinal assessment suggests that we are not currently living in an ideal ecclesial world,” Farrell continued.
Yet, she said, the sisters also “cannot make too little” of the Vatican’s move. It’s “historical impact,” she said, is “apparent to all of us.”Isn't that simply remarkable?
Oh, that we had asked the same questions of the Anglican Covenant! Wait, wait. wait. Hang on just a minute. In fact, I think we have.
In fact, I think we did concern ourselves with issues of "control through fear and intimidation". And, I think we did ask the question: "Does the institutional legitimacy of canonical recognition empower us to live prophetically? Does it allow us the freedom to question with informed consciences? "
Just because the Anglican Covenant appears to be dead in the water, it is too soon to dismiss it as a dead issue. As I said in a post earlier this week, depending on who is elected the next Archbishop of Canterbury, we could be witnesses to the resurrection of that dread document. Unfortunately, the Episcopal Church's "umm..., maybe, but not yet" response in B005 will only kindle the spark of power and control that continues to smolder in the councils and corridors of the institutional church.
It was ever thus, my dears. It's the Anglican Covenant for our generation. It was the 39 Articles in a previous generation. Don't even get me started about the political nature of the Nicene Creed.
Meanwhile, these religious woman - these, "nuns" - continue to be dismissed as being "old, dying women". If I hear, one more time, that the average age of nuns in the US is 70, I'm going to scream. As if that has anything to do with the liberation of the Gospel, promised to us all.
God delights in surprising the human race S/he created. Ever since The Garden, God has surprised us with the unexpected. God surprised Sarah in her old age with the gift of a child. God surprised us by choosing Mary, a young un-married woman, to be the Theotokis, the God-bearer.
I suspect God is surprising us all with the prophetic witness of these "sisters" of ours, who are, I believed, being called to give birth to a new understanding of the power and authority of the institutional church.
One that is humble, but not submissive. Rooted in a solid sense of ourselves, but not self-righteous. Truthful, but gentle and absolutely fearless.
What a vision of the church! What a profound understanding of obedience and power and authority.
I just checked. No word yet from The Sisters. No smoke coming from St. Louis, so no one has tried to run them out of the building. At least, nothing has hit the newsstands in cyberspace.
I'll keep you posted as soon as I get word.
Meanwhile, I ask you to join me in prayer for them. It's a short little, "arrow prayer" like the kind the nuns of my youth taught me. (It is also known as an "ejaculatory prayer" - like saying, 'Jesus, Mary and Joseph' or writing JMJ on the top of your exam paper). It's just eleven words of prayer:
Go, Sisters! Be gentle but fearless with the truth you know.
Amen.
UPDATE HERE:
At the end of its annual assembly Friday in St. Louis, the Leadership Conference of Women Religious said it will proceed with discussion with the Vatican "for as long as possible" but will reconsider if the sisters are "forced to compromise the integrity of [their] mission."
I love it. They said, "make us".
Gentle but fearless, baby. Gentle but fearless.
Go, Sisters!
12 comments:
I have been watching and waiting to see the sisters response too. I am so proud of them. Always my heros . Go sisters!
Given the times of the protests in my area I have been unable to go and support them in person. But they definitely have my support.
Maria
In 10-15 years most of these nuns will be too old to do much except ask for more stewed prunes.
Why the bishops are bothering with the bad publicity is beyond me but it's par for the course for pedophile enablers.
I've seen pictures of the nuns-odd that for a group which claims to "celebrate our church's diversity" they've managed to remain over 98% White.
Considering that they want "to represent the future of our church", you've got to think that their church's future is around 1880.
Maria ~ I am the priest I am today because of the teaching and role modeling of these women. Brava!
Turnip ghost ~ Well, you are entitled to your own opinion ~ one which I obviously don't share. I believe that part of the discrimination from the Vatican comes directly from the fact that, rather than enabling pedophiles, they helped to expose them. And, speaking of predjuice, aren't you being ageist? God always works through the most unlikely in our midst. Just spend some time reading scripture instead of stewing in your own venom.
"I believe that part of the discrimination from the Vatican comes directly from the fact that, rather than enabling pedophiles, they helped to expose them."
Oh really? While the American dioceses and male religious orders were pulled kicking and screaming into the realm of justice, LCWR has strenously opposed following the Dallas Charter.
See http://www.snapnetwork.org/snap_will_try_to_hand_deliver_letter_to_head_of_nuns_group
for details.
Of course, there have been individual women religious who have been instrumental in taking down some perverts (in my neck of the woods, the infamous Bishop Ziemann of Santa Rosa). However, in the main the female religous orders have escaped law enforcement actions vis-a-vis the sexual abuse of minors.
xxMichael
Slow day at the office, Michael? "In the main" the nuns have operated as they always have: beneath the radar. Since they are women, I don't expect you to notice.
"Beneath the radar."
Yeah, that's the excuse the bishops of old gave when hustling away a pervert priest: "We'll move him away where he can't hurt anybody."
Well, the RC dioceses and male religious orders of the US can no longer play that game-- or suffer when they try to (cf Kansas City)-- but the women's religious orders still, as a group, do not adhere to the Dallas Charter and many of the Catholic faithful in the US have noticed.
xxMichael
Michael - you know darn well that's not what I meant. Unless you can substantiate your claims against the Sisters, what you are saying is just gossip. I won't be printing slanderous gossip about them.
Grow up, Michael. And learn to respect women.
I gave you a link to SNAP- Survivor's Network of those Abused by Priests-- and their grievances against the LCWR. You can also read on the front page of the Bishop of Kansas City who is in deep trouble for his lackadaisical approach to priest sexual abuse. I personally know victims of women religious who have gotten nowhere with the orders. No rumormongering here, just a profound hatred of the sexual abuse of children and the coverup of the same.
xxMichael
Of course, you don't think I would know about SNAP. I'm just a woman. What would I know? For your information, I worked with several young men to establish SNAP - along with a few nuns. No, the LCWR has not done what SNAP wants them to do. To be honest, SNAP's demands are not unreasonable - if the institutional church were a reasonable organization. The truth is that they're not. If they were, we wouldn't have the situation we're in. So, the nuns do what they can do - still taking enormous risks, even though some of their actions are, admittedly, not enough.
So, Michael, what have YOU done to expose the truth about pedophiles? Have you even ministered to someone who has been abused? Instead of sitting around throwing stones at women who have no institutional power or authority, why not use your male privilege and power to do something?
If I didn't know your part in founding SNAP, it hasn't nothing to do with my "masculine privilege" and all about an apparently misleading ABOUT US page at SNAP. You are nowhere mentioned.
"No, the LCWR has not done what SNAP wants them to do." That's a bit of an understatement. The larger problem is that LCWR won't push its member orders to do as much as the dioceses and male religous orders now do under the Dallas Charter.
I've had some opportunity to minister to survivors of sexual abuse. Quite frankly, because of my limited counseling skills I make referrals to professional mental health workers, but that hasn't stopped my from walking along in faith with a couple people (one male, one female) concurrent with their professional counseling regimen.
To answer your last paragraph, within my own presbyterate I'm seen as the troglodyte, the most strident voice for "one strike you're out" when it comes to grave sexual sins in the priesthood. Believe me, my online stidency isn't one-half of my intensity in real life. Apologetics on behalf of sexual perversion doesn't last long in my presence before it elicits a furious response.
xxMichael
I also don't make any excuses for sexual abuse and I agree with your colleagues: You are a troglodyte.
Post a Comment