Vatican report on US nuns to be released in Rome

I really hope the sisters that disagree with the Church’s teaching have had a change of heart. I would hate to lose them because they do some much good for the poor and needy. But, having said that I hope that they practice obedience to the Church when asked too. Obedience and humility are excellent traits in our Church.

see link.

news.yahoo.com/vatican-report-us-nuns-released-rome-162046766.html

Yahoo spins it to get the reader to believe that most nuns disagree with the Catholic Church. And I don’t think most do.

i’m sure it’s a minority, and i think the church is patient not wanting any to be lost, but all to be saved.

Just to avoid confusion, we should be aware that this is not from the CDF’s investigation of the LCWR.

There are two things currently going on. The Vatican’s Cong for Religious is doing a visitation of US religious, which this upcoming report is about.

Separately, the Cong for the Doctrine of the Faith is doing an investigation of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, which is not connected to this report.

If one wants to sort through all the ground chatter, perhaps the best method is to look at an order, and see how many they have joining the order who are under the age of 30 to 35.
The orders which have had the greatest problems with Rome are simply going to die out. Sadly, because years ago, those same orders were a vibrant part of the Church and provided tremendous support in many areas.

Many are not orders at all but institutes. There has not been a religious order founded in 400 years.

:frowning: sadden to know.

It’s not sad, in fact to me it is grand to know that the moniker “order” is restricted to the oldest and most venerable institutes that yet thrive in the Catholic world. And the fact that other, newer institutes are instead known as congregations, or societies of apostolic life, lends some seasoning to the mixture of religious life. The 1983 Code of Canon Law broke down some barriers and made many new things possible. I think there were many positive changes contained therein.

Technically societies of apostolic life are not religious institutes. The members are not necessarily consecrated nor take vows (though in some cases they can). They do, however, live a similar vocation.

The issue is that only very conservative women are choosing the religious life and that religious life has become more fragmented. Therefore, the women choosing religious life are already more conservative and are choosing orders that confirm their biases. In the 1970s, there were more mainstream type of woman who might have felt called to religious life and there were fewer traditionalist type splinter groups. So a woman who was religious and felt called to help the poor might feel called to join a convent in the 1960s; now there are lots of opportunities for her to pursue works of social justice within the Church as a laywoman as well as having a family. And women who were from traditional families in the past who would have chosen mainstream orders like the Franciscans are now choosing the Latin Mass Order of XYZ. The concern is that the mainstream women who in the past would have joined orders aren’t joining and that the women who do join get a wider experience of the Church. The Church needs the talents of women as nuns and it also needs more mainstream orders than Latin Mass Order of XYZ to survive to have a healthier religious life.

If you think religious life is following a “call to help the poor” and “pursue works of social justice” without having a family, then you have another thing coming. If you think that religious life is only for conservative people, then perhaps you should rethink what you label as “conservative” and what you label as “mainstream”.

The mainstream of Catholicism is orthodoxy. The center of Christianity is right belief and practice. There are fringe beliefs on both sides, but they can both be out of bounds.

Crux will be following it and will give updates as it rolls out

cruxnow.com

I guess if you enjoy a particularly inaccurate, foaming-at-the-mouth, and heterodox spin on things, this noveau version of the National Catholic Reporter is alright. I am sure there are more faithful and useful sources somewhere out there.

:wink:

I trust John Allan’s reporting, hands down.

There are lots of religious women who would have been called religious life in the 1960s who are becoming lay liturgical ministers now. If I’m a woman there are plenty of ways that I can serve the Church and still have a family, there is no reason for me to take religious vows now.

The only ones taking religious vows are traditionalist type Catholics. I’ve been watching the Sisterhood on Lifetime as fluff sort of TV and I’ve been struck how much Claire, the supposedly traditionalist Catholic, seems unready for Catholic religious life. She seems very judgmental and critical and unwilling to learn from the other girls. It concerns me that only types like Claire are becoming nuns. In the past Claire and Sundrop Hippie would both enter the same convent and would learn from each other. Now Sundrop Hippie isn’t entering a convent and Claire is entering a traditionalist convent that conforms to her worldview. In the end the Catholic Church isn’t getting the gits that Sundrop Hippie could bring to the Church and the traditionalist type girls aren’t prepared to actually do the dirty work that the nuns do. Could you imagine the precious little middle class suburban homeschooled girls doing the work that Mother Teresa did or actually being able to relate to prostitutes or live in the dirty conditions of the third world?

You have a narrow view of religious life.

Serious? You’re basing your opinion on a single reality TV show? You need to get out more.

I am not sure where you are getting your information. I don’t read the Wanderer or the Remnant, so I am not getting my information there.

What I do read is Our Sunday Visitor (which has had several articles on the matter) and The National Catholic Register, both of which are centrist rather than on the end of the spectrum that National Catholic Reporter, or the other end of the spectrum or the two first mentioned.

They are reporting on healthy, growing communities which are not “Latin Mass Order of XYZ” as you so pretentiously set out dismissively. Yes, they wear some form of habit; some a more formal one than others, but none of them seem ashamed of being identified as a processed religious.

And I don’t know - maybe you consider Franciscan and Dominican communities as “non mainstream”, but if you do, it tells me a whole lot of what you think. And they are orders which seem to have resolved that use of the Enneagram really is not consistent with 2,000 years of Christianity, and the LOTH is. Funny how that all works to the surface.

Narrow? or so broad as to defy definition? :shrug:

He included them in the traditional foot-washing ritual.

He recognized that in the Bible, women’s importance in the history and evolution of Christianity were not recorded, “because, according to the Jewish Law of the time, women and children were not considered reliable, credible witnesses.”

Yet he affirms they had a “primary, fundamental role.”

And Pope Francis has said several times that he wants and intends for women to be more active and have expanded roles in the church of the future.

Perhaps, with whatever he is planning to do to make this happen…more women will be interested to take a role in the church.

.

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.