At an April 15 meeting with officials of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR), the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) reported that Pope Francis has reaffirmed the need for reform in the LCWR.Catholic Culture
More from the National Catholic Register.
…so in lame-O terms, what exactly does this mean?
That is reassuring to hear. Just think if women religious were to be faithful witnesses to Christ in all areas as they once were. Let us pray that they will not cling to wrong ways out of stubborn pride but be willing to let the Holy Spirit guide them and follow our Blessed Mother’s example. It may be a bumpy road to get there but the journey has to start somewhere.
This is great news:)
The injection of a large force of women (and Men) religious into healthcare and education.
professions they dominated.
Would be the single biggest deterrent to the incredable costs in these areas that are dooming our future.
It means the media’s love affair with Pope Francis is predictably coming to an end now that they realize he’s Catholic.
Couldn’t have said it better myself
Thx. I dig your avatar, btw. :o
I think this is the start of the media’s love affair coming to an end. I think there will now be an awkward phase where the media/LCWR tries desperately to spin whatever Francis does to suit their ideology, ie “Francis reaffirms need to reform LCWR really means Francis wants LCWR to stay exactly the same”. Then, after this phase, the love affair will end completely, and they’ll viciously attack him.
God bless Archbishop Sartain… he has quite a task ahead of him.
(And therefore, fully in keeping with the Church’s social justice mandate.)
This is one of the best ways that the Church can address these needs: by incentivizing and supporting the return by religious orders to needs that cannot be as economically addressed,let alone as faithfully addressed, by any other means.
I honestly do not understand why the LCWR is surprised. The Church is always in need of reform, and that includes all of us.
While what you say is true, think about the attitude you are projecting. It boils down to: “It sure would be nice if a whole heck of a lot more people would work for me for free.”
Not to attack you in particular (as a catholic school tuition paying parent I can relate to the sentiment), but this sort of attitude towards the religious is part of why we don’t have many anymore. They aren’t there to make your life cheaper, they are there to serve God.
Whoa. Where do have any evidence that gus believes that Religious should work for him “for free?” I did not at all perceive that to be the point of his post.
this sort of attitude towards the religious is part of why we don’t have many anymore. They aren’t there to make your life cheaper, they are there to serve God.
Again, you have not established what gus’ “attitude” is. How would you know something so internal/private?
Yes, religious are there to serve God, and to serve God through the Church and the Church’s needs, which include healthcare and education, among many other needs, both practical and spiritual.
But still a Jesuit. That was the first thing that came out of the mouth of the CBS reporter when he heard the announcement Mar 13th. Just sayin.
Its a return to the mission of the church
I’m not suggesting anything new
It seems to me that the media had some mythological view of Jesuits, that, perhaps because some have dissented historically, that this Jesuit Pope would therefore overturn dogmas the secular media loathes, thus leading to the destruction of the Church. I suppose some of them may have been naïve enough to think dogmatic overturn was possible. But part of me cynically suspects many of them know better but seek to drive a wedge into the Church, and between her members.
Who said anything about working for free? The number of religious who used to work in healthcare, education and working with the poor has dwindled. Congregations are so sparse that they often don’t even live in community. More sisters would mean that congregations wouldn’t have to, for example, back out of teaching in order to feed the poor. They could do BOTH.
This is an attitude that we should applaud, not attack.