Little Old Nuns - Scare the Vatican?


#1

The Vatican recently "cracked down" on women religious orders, citing "radical feminism" as one of the concerns! "Radical feminism is a current theoretical perspective within feminism that focuses on the theory of patriarchy as a system of power that organizes society into a complex of relationships based on an assumption that male supremacy[1] oppresses women. Radical feminism aims to challenge and overthrow patriarchy by opposing standard gender roles and oppression of women and calls for a radical reordering of society" (Wikipedia Definition)

Is the church patriarchial? Yes! Are there aspects within administrative decisions and power relationships where bishops have been plain jerks with respect to women clergy? Yes! The idea that the feminine aspects of God have been underestimated not by Catholic teaching but by the deliverers of the Catholic message is undeniable, so why would the Vatican display such oppressive measures as to tell women religious (the women who taught us our catechism, etc.) to fall into line with a power relationship detrimental to women?

What happened to the spirit of the 60's when we talked about these things...? The church cannot "shut the people" up anymore about such things as gay marriages, women priests and so forth, she can simply and humbly state her position as a global community of faith and start having faith in God's gift to all of us - our rationale, brains and openess to the Spirit of God...thoughts?

Bruce
Trickster


#2

[quote="trickster, post:1, topic:282645"]
The Vatican recently "cracked down" on women religious orders, citing "radical feminism" as one of the concerns! "Radical feminism is a current theoretical perspective within feminism that focuses on the theory of patriarchy as a system of power that organizes society into a complex of relationships based on an assumption that male supremacy[1] oppresses women. Radical feminism aims to challenge and overthrow patriarchy by opposing standard gender roles and oppression of women and calls for a radical reordering of society" (Wikipedia Definition)

Is the church patriarchial? Yes! Are there aspects within administrative decisions and power relationships where bishops have been plain jerks with respect to women clergy? Yes! The idea that the feminine aspects of God have been underestimated not by Catholic teaching but by the deliverers of the Catholic message is undeniable, so why would the Vatican display such oppressive measures as to tell women religious (the women who taught us our catechism, etc.) to fall into line with a power relationship detrimental to women?

What happened to the spirit of the 60's when we talked about these things...? The church cannot "shut the people" up anymore about such things as gay marriages, women priests and so forth, she can simply and humbly state her position as a global community of faith and start having faith in God's gift to all of us - our rationale, brains and openess to the Spirit of God...thoughts?

Bruce
Trickster

[/quote]

Pray tell, do any young adult Catholics share your revolutionary spirit regarding the practices of the Catholic Church? With that in mind, the changes you desire are positions found among a minority of religious and lay Catholics at odds with the orthodox faith and living in a world that seems to desire nothing but to recapture the false spirit of the Second Vatican Council in the 21st century.


#3

There are so many things I could touch on but here are only a few, in no particular order:

The doctrinal orthodoxy of the LCWR is clearly very unsatisfactory.

Please note that this isn't about "nuns," or even sisters at large for that matter. This is about the renegade LCWR, a group whose membership includes the leadership of many women Religious' congregations. This is not about individual congregations of women.

There are plenty of orthodox sisters who, before the LCWR's shenanigans, flourished, but have since been practically silenced and relegated to nothingness in their congregations.

Let me also remind you that there are several quite orthodox congregations in the USA, like the Nashville Dominicans, and I can assure you that the Vatican is not worried about these.

There is no such thing as women clergy.

The Sixties are dead.

The Church is not some sort of administrative para-religious news agency/memo routing firm as some seem to imply. It is a divine institution founded by God Himself, with divine power.


#4

[quote="trickster, post:1, topic:282645"]
...thoughts?

Bruce
Trickster

[/quote]

My thought is that you are trying to live up to your nickname.

Peace

Tim


#5

Hey trickster: I don't believe in male supremacy or that women are inferior beings.

I couldn't care less IF the Church believes that. It can go on believing whatever it wants, but as the old saying goes, "thinking don't make it so." I've really become very tired of this little game we have to play, it's absurd on its face.


#6

[quote="trickster, post:1, topic:282645"]
thoughts?

[/quote]

Clearly the Vatican waited far too long, as your post is an example of all that is wrong with what these "little old nuns" taught people.


#7

[quote="PA650, post:2, topic:282645"]
Pray tell, do any young adult Catholics share your revolutionary spirit regarding the practices of the Catholic Church? With that in mind, the changes you desire are positions found among a minority of religious and lay Catholics at odds with the orthodox faith and living in a world that seems to desire nothing but to recapture the false spirit of the Second Vatican Council in the 21st century.

[/quote]

Attacks on Vatican II are no more profitable than the OP's outlook. The OP seems to forget the Church also has authority and is not a democracy but rather the earthly part of a Kingdom.


#8

[quote="trickster, post:1, topic:282645"]

(Snip)

....so why would the Vatican display such oppressive measures as to tell women religious (the women who taught us our catechism, etc.) to fall into line with a power relationship detrimental to women?

[/quote]

What "power relationship" is that??

Jesus taught that he would be first must be the servant of the others. He who is first shall be last and the last shall be first.

Thus - if the "power relationship" is patriarchal as you describe and as you seem to understand it...then, bu Christ's own words it is NOT detrimental to women but to their advantage...

What happened to the spirit of the 60's when we talked about these things...? The church cannot "shut the people" up anymore about such things as gay marriages, women priests and so forth, she can simply and humbly state her position as a global community of faith and start having faith in God's gift to all of us - our rationale, brains and openess to the Spirit of God...thoughts?

The "Spirit of the 60's" has given way to the rational consolidation of the 2000's.

We can only "talk about these things" for so long and then there needs to be a concerted effort within the Church to come to consensus - based upon the foundational teachings of the Church.
Now there is nothing in this that prevents the, "having faith in God's gift to all of us - our rationale, brains and openness to the Spirit of God". But at the same time we, as individuals or sects within the community, must be willing to submit ourselves to the community as a whole, that is to the Historical Church - and to "Listen to the Church" (Mt 18:15-18 on these matters.

Those who attended the Council of Jerusalem (recorded in Acts 15) from every side of the issue believed themselves to be right. Some had to leave the council having been shown that they were wrong. Many more who were NOT at the council had to humbly submit to the decision of the council.

At some point...Decisions must be made. Humility requires submission for the peace of the Church.

Finally -
Those who wish to call themselves Catholic - and especially those who wish to serve God through the Catholic religious life should - indeed must present themselves as faithful Catholics who adhere to and promote the authentic teachings of the Church.

Are these enough thoughts for you??;)

Peace
James


#9

You are a master of satire, Bruce.

I mean that was satire, right?


#10

[quote="trickster, post:1, topic:282645"]
The Vatican recently "cracked down" on women religious orders, citing "radical feminism" as one of the concerns! "Radical feminism is a current theoretical perspective within feminism that focuses on the theory of patriarchy as a system of power that organizes society into a complex of relationships based on an assumption that male supremacy[1] oppresses women. Radical feminism aims to challenge and overthrow patriarchy by opposing standard gender roles and oppression of women and calls for a radical reordering of society" (Wikipedia Definition)

Is the church patriarchial? Yes! Are there aspects within administrative decisions and power relationships where bishops have been plain jerks with respect to women clergy? Yes! The idea that the feminine aspects of God have been underestimated not by Catholic teaching but by the deliverers of the Catholic message is undeniable, so why would the Vatican display such oppressive measures as to tell women religious (the women who taught us our catechism, etc.) to fall into line with a power relationship detrimental to women?

What happened to the spirit of the 60's when we talked about these things...? The church cannot "shut the people" up anymore about such things as gay marriages, women priests and so forth, she can simply and humbly state her position as a global community of faith and start having faith in God's gift to all of us - our rationale, brains and openess to the Spirit of God...thoughts?

Bruce
Trickster

[/quote]

Your profile says you are Catholic. It seems odd that someone would belong to a religion that he or she thinks is oppressive and teaches morality that he or she does not believe.


#11

[quote="JharekCarnelian, post:7, topic:282645"]
Attacks on Vatican II are no more profitable than the OP's outlook. The OP seems to forget the Church also has authority and is not a democracy but rather the earthly part of a Kingdom.

[/quote]

Amen! I think that sums up the situation very nicely.


#12

[quote="Brooklyn, post:11, topic:282645"]
Amen! I think that sums up the situation very nicely.

[/quote]

I should have I note phrased it a little bit diferently, the Church is eternal and composed ot several parts. What we see here (for the most part and most of the time) is the Earthly part of that. If our OP wanted to discuss the flaws of particular regimes that is one thing. However instead he seems to be trying to advance several agendas as revealed in the last few lines of his post.


#13

It is true that *some *male members of the hierarchy have been jerks… and some nuns were jerks, too! But, wow, guess what? Every one of us is a jerk sometimes. You, me, the guy sitting across from me… That is simply a part of human nature.

The Church is the Body of Christ–What do you think we should do, make Christ look like a Picasso painting? Because that is what the *particular *nuns whom the report chastised seem to want.

Is the church patriarchial? Yes! Are there aspects within administrative decisions and power relationships where bishops have been plain jerks with respect to women clergy? Yes!

And did God not put men over women after the Fall? Yes, it is rough, but *life is rough. *Life *is *unfair. It is that way to *everyone. *

The idea that the feminine aspects of God have been underestimated not by Catholic teaching but by the deliverers of the Catholic message is undeniable,

What is this? God Himself has presented Himself as male, Christ was male; God does not have “feminine aspects”–what utter rubbish. Are men devoid of the virtues we tend to attribute to women; are men incapable fo showing mercy, are men always completely dispassionate? Maybe the problem is with our society’s views of the way men ought to be and the way women ought to be rather than with the reality we find when we look with an open mind?

so why would the Vatican display such oppressive measures as to tell women religious (the women who taught us our catechism, etc.) to fall into line with a power relationship detrimental to women?

First, the nuns who were chastised were teaching not the Catechism but *heresy. *When people speculate that women can be ordained, that homosexuals can marry, that the marital embrace can morally be frustrated, etc. *they are going right against perennial Church teachings. *They were not chastised for teaching us our catechsim, they were chastised for teaching *contrary to the Church. *

What happened to the spirit of the 60’s when we talked about these things…?

Let’s consider the fruits of “talking about these things:” rates of cohabitation, divorce, and abortion skyrocketed. Birth rates plummetted. Real family wages have stagnated even tho many wives and mothers entered the workforce in search of their identities. People were totally confused and left the Church.

I was there for the spirit of the 60’s: I have seen the results, and it was horrible. Just because one aspect of our society desperately needed fixing and it was fixed did nto mean that *every *aspect of our society needed to be fixed. Overall, the spirit of the 60’s was destructive.

The church cannot “shut the people” up anymore about such things as gay marriages, women priests and so forth, she can simply and humbly state her position as a global community of faith and start having faith in God’s gift to all of us - our rationale, brains and openess to the Spirit of God… …

And why don’t we attack the squararchy while we are at it; why should squares always have 4 sides? Why should the sides always be equal? Why can’t we have a square with 5 unequal sides? This is oppession of the squares over other shapes!!!

You write as if reality does not intrude into your world. If the nuns want to go out and have women Fathers, homosexual attempts at marriage and the like, there are “ecclesial” communities which are open to this radical ignoring of reality. The nuns were rightly chastised by the Vatican.


#14

And this has exactly what to do with Traditional Catholicism ? Or is it simply a "Ha Ha my priest said he'd never say the Latin Mass and he thinks women should be ordained" type of thread posted for no other purpose but to try and irritate Traditional Catholics ?


#15

This is not a new issue. I am on my second career and attend a Catholic University. I was invited to a women's conference on campus to hear a "great speaker" none other than Sr. Joan Chittester, the great "questioner" or modern day female version of Socrates? Before the conference there was a "pre-conference". There I witnessed a deep dissatisfaction with the Catholic Church's hierarchy and practices. The women religious do in fact feel as though they are not appreciated and some of their goals are indeed to change the Catholic Church. They expressed a desire to be priests, desire to be heard, desire to be in charge, desire to be out from under the vatican's thumb. They do feel oppressed and silenced. I was agast. I was asked questions about my faith and what I thought about women becoming priests, and I answered something to the effect of women's role as significant and one among other things--nurturer and necessary to the church. That women are indeed valuable and worthy of appreciation, but.... the priesthood has been deemed solely for men. I was not allowed to participate in any more dialogue, I was not invited to attend the actual conference. As I learned more about Sr. Chittester, I would not have attended the conference anyway. The sisters at this university and across the city (not all but many) do not wear religious vestments. They wear civilian clothing, make-up and jewelry. During 2008, the only presidential candidate represented by campaign posters and life-size pictures was then president elect Obama, knowing B Obama's stance on abortion and pro-choice. I was appalled! In a nutshell there seems to be a growing number of Chittester followers, one of the requisite readings for young religious entering the order, and sisters in general in the area is Joan Chittester's book on questioning. I was a fallen away Catholic and returned about 20 years ago. I see more clearly the structure of the Catholic Church and how women do have a role, and are needed to fulfill the needs of the Catholic Church. If men are treating the women in a degrading manner, that is not "the church". I asked a convert one day, why do you want to change the Catholic Church to bow to your whims? The episcopalian religion already has female priests, one gay priest that I know of and they are almost identical to the Catholic Church, why not go there instead of converting to Catholicism and immediately start to chip away at a 2000+ year old dynamic? I stated that I did not believe she understood what Catholicism was and that perhaps she should reexamine her conscious. She was a very new convert who entered the religious order, when I met her she was in jeans and a t-shirt, with a simple name tag which she referred to as her "habit", however she was being heavily indoctrinated into Chittester's philosophy of questioning and demanding women be allowed to be priests. I think women religious need to have a dialogue and the men should listen to them and put their hearts at ease. It's easy to fall victim to people like Chittester who is a skilled manipulator and a religious herself. If only the vatican would silence her, she has collected quite a few followers and she's done a lot of damage. As a woman and mother, I am saddened to see this huge breakdown of the beautiful religious life they have chosen and feel burdened with. If that's not enough, some of the franciscan brothers are just as radicalized as the sisters. Some of the things I've heard from their very mouths make me shudder. I wish the arch diocese would reach out to them and have a dialogue and work on rebuilding the Catholic faith among the religious.


#16

Oh Trickster I read your post and almost weep with Hope. I am not seeing much written within the Catholic community about this. We get attacks from the media, but within the church everyone is simply falling in line. Of course, we are not a democracy. I always thought we were authoritative, but I am seeing more and more authoritarianism. Scary.

The reality now is evident in several points: young people are thirsting for order, discipline, mystery, and the sacred as evidenced in ritual and the Church hierarchy is responding bigtime. Have you not read the posts on this forum that are just waiting for us "hippies of the 70's, and babyboomers to die off" so that the church can return unfettered by our sensibilities to the grace of the 40's and 50's.

On one hand I can understand the need - the young need something to hold on to. Desire for mystery in the generation is evidenced by the popularity of books, movies, TV offerings about the occult and monsters. I hope along with the "rules and regs" of a legalistic church, they also get good catechesis on the Christology of Love and compassion. They need that, as we all do, as much or more that mystery that separates us from aware participation in the Mass and Liturgy.

Having lived through the 40's and 50's, I know it was not so grace filled. But as they say . . whatever.

I recall a commentator (Catholic) soon after Pope Benedict was elected saying that we were heading for a remnant Church, meaning that there was going to be a lot of people excluded. I pray that is not so, but I am fearful. There are so many calls for interdiction, excommunication etc., will the Bishops respond to that.

It is interesting to watch the rapprochement of the far right groups with the Vatican, while the left wingers are more and more marginalized.

I really never thought of myself as a radical feminist, but they might think me so.

It distresses me that the good nuns who have had the temerity to think and act according to their corporate conscience are under attack, while orders of dissident priests are invited back. I don't like to even think that these are good distractions from the scandals which have plagued our church. That certainly may not be the intent, but I bet it will be an effect.

We need to pray for our Bishops, that the Holy Spirit will guide them is right paths.


#17

Why is this posted in “Traditional Catholicism?”


#18

Rather than a point by point, I think I'll just answer one question.

[quote="trickster, post:1, topic:282645"]
What happened to the spirit of the 60's when we talked about these things...?

[/quote]

We talk about these things, or we ask questions, to come up with answers. We came up with answers. And one of the answers is that the "spirit of the 60s" was a bunch of.. ahem. In any case, the "spirit of the 60s," or at least what I think you mean when you use that phrase, is being slowly eroded and is hopefully slated to disappear for ever within the next couple decades. It will not be missed.

Not that the church is not trying to "shut people up." But the Church can and does decide what the Church says, and these people are trying to put words in the mouth of the Church that the Church is not saying. Or to quote then Cardinal Ratzinger:

“To say that someone’s opinion doesn’t correspond to the doctrine of the Catholic church doesn’t mean violating their human rights ...Everyone should have the right to freely express their own view, which the Catholic church decisively recognized at Vatican II and still does today. This doesn’t mean, however, that every opinion must be recognized as Catholic.”

The Church says gay marriage and the ordination of women are absolutely impossible. If you want to disagree, well I suppose you can. But your beliefs are no longer Catholic if you do so. And furthermore, since the Catholic beliefs are the correct ones, you are simply wrong.


#19

Trickster always like to stir the pot. I think he enjoys being the Pan of the Traditional Catholicism forum.


#20

[quote="St_Francis, post:13, topic:282645"]

And did God not put men over women after the Fall? Yes, it is rough, but *life is rough. *Life *is *unfair. It is that way to *everyone. *

[/quote]

Either prove that men are superior to women or; deal with it when we laugh at such arguments.

And why don't we attack the squararchy while we are at it; why should squares always have 4 sides? Why should the sides always be equal? Why can't we have a square with 5 unequal sides? This is oppession of the squares over other shapes!!!!!!!

So male superiority is as tautological as square = four sides? :rolleyes:


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.