Home » US News » Nuns’ leader seeks dialogue with Vatican to plead case

Nuns’ leader seeks dialogue with Vatican to plead case

 

Sister Janet Mock, a Pittsburgher at the center of the dispute between the Vatican and an umbrella group for nuns, is perplexed at the order for an archbishop to oversee her work.

She acknowledges that a few sisters have moved so far outside church tradition that it’s difficult to recognize them as Catholic. But the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, of which she is the executive director, didn’t encourage that, she said.

“I have been actively involved in LCWR for over 20 years and, for the life of me, I don’t know what the myth is that makes it such an ogre in the church,” said the Sister of St. Joseph of Baden.

On Tuesday she will meet in Rome with Cardinal William Levada of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and Archbishop J. Peter Sartain of Seattle, who is slated to oversee a reform of the LCWR. They will discuss the sisters’ concerns that the evaluation is unfair.

“Somebody, and we don’t know who, is behind all of this questioning of our organization,” she said. “If we could just sit down with whoever has a question, I think it would be easier. This comes close to maligning the organization, painting everybody in it with the same brush.”

The Vatican chartered the LCWR in 1956. Its 1,500 members represent 80 percent of 57,000 sisters in the United States. Complaints of theological laxity date back decades. In 1992 the Vatican chartered an alternative group for more conservative orders.

In 2001 Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger — now Pope Benedict XVI — issued a doctrinal warning about the LCWR. In 2008 the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith ordered an investigation. The findings were released April 18 and the Vatican ordered a five-year reform.

The assessment praised sisters’ service to the needy. But it cited “serious doctrinal problems.” It complained of dissent and radical feminism, accusing the sisters of silence on abortion and failing to promote church teaching on ordination and sexuality. [More]

SOURCE

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

 
 
 
 

26 Comments

  1. Mary says:

    News flash Polycarp – Issues of Faith and Morals are not negotiable and there can be no dialog. As Jim has said, the Catholic Church is not a democracy.

    • Polycarp says:

      Then why the Vatican Diplomacy, why the voting in monasterys and during Councils, why the diologue right now with the Women Religious and the Curia, why meetings?

    • Polycarp says:

      While certain matters of Fath and Morals are not negotiable the articulation and understanding of these matters are certainly opoen to dialogue and disucssion.

      • Jim says:

        Well, yes, Polycarp, “Sister” Janet can listen to the Vatican as the Vatican dialogues; for her part, she can ask questions so she can understand what the Church teaches. Perhaps she should sit in on an RCIA course conducted by a faithful priest.

        • Polycarp says:

          The point is that Sister understands full well what the church teaches and as a theologian tries to go even deeper to get to the truth and attempts to present truth iunder a different light. You will recall that even Aquinas and Boneventure were suspect in some of the things they wrote.
          It is only small mined conservatives who know it all like you who can’t understand that.
          Ask your nurse to give you your medicine. You need it

          • Jim says:

            Hey Polycarp, now let me make a suggestion to you: I don’t recommend you see a therapist, I recommend you see a de-programmer who can disabuse you of your inaccurate, 20th-century acquired aversion to what you term anger. Ephesians 4:26 is very clear: “Be angry, but sin not.” I still haven’t seen you answer my question about Jesus cursing the fig tree until it withered to the ground, then going to Jerusalem to flip over the tables in the temple. Remember, He was meek and humble of heart, so how do you reconcile those two observations when you have the kind of conception you do concerning what you call anger?

    • Polycarp says:

      Mary, we do walk by faith, enlightened by reason and it is with this reason that theologians are looking at our theology. Theologians are trying to expand and stretch our vision and our understanding. Psychology and sociology have added to our understanding of human nature and theologians are looking to enhance our understanding .

  2. Jim says:

    News flash, psuedo-sister Janet, God is not a democracy. He does not negotiate His laws. Either follow His laws and the Magisterium of the Church, or leave and start your own Church.

    • Polycarp says:

      New flash Jim, religious act with one another in mutual respect and dialoge as does Vatican Diplomacy. You don’t like that leave and start your own church

      • Jim says:

        And if fact, Polycarp, I respect “Sister” Janet so much that I trust she has the ability to come around to supporting the Church if someone tells her the truth about how far off the mark she is. If you look at how the prophets in the OT addressed the Jewish people, it was not in this disgusting, 21st-century feminized manner.

      • Jim says:

        And Polycarp, I never will leave the Catholic Church. But you can be sure I will steer people as far away as I can from these heretical nuns. BTW, I hope you were watching EWTN last night at 10:00 P.M. EST — they were addressing this very issue of the gross problems with the LCWR. But perhaps you don’t watch EWTN — a little to faithful to the Church to suit you?

        • Polycarp says:

          Heretical nuns is a terrible label yo throw around you sick un charitable, un Christian, A hole.

          • Jim says:

            Wow, Polycarp, calling me an “A hole” for being what you term uncharitable to the nuns. Look in the mirror, my friend. I never called the nuns such a pejoritive term; I simply am reporting what they are: heretical. They meet the definition of a heretic: they espouse false teachings. Now, how can you justify calling me an “a hole?” Sounds like you have more growing to do in your Catholic walk. Why don’t you pray for me instead? That’s what Christains do. As St. Stephen was dying, he prayed for those who were stoning him — he wasn’t calling them “a holes.”

            • Polycarp says:

              And I for my part am just reporting what you are, an A hole.

              • Jim says:

                Really? “A hole” is an abusive term; the term “heretic” is not. Sorry, Polycarp, look in the mirror. You are the one spewing inappropriate anger — this is sinful anger. It is not sinful to call a true heretic a heretic — that is an act of love. Calling someone an “a hole” never can be constructive, because it is offensive without providing guidance. Calling a person a heretic does provide guidance — it tells the person what they can do to get back on track. I think you have an anger problem, Polycarp. BTW, a suggestion — don’t co-opt the name of a very holy father of the church. He never would have addressed people the way you do.

                • Polycarp says:

                  It is impossible to argue with a fool. I am leavingf this site.

                  • Jim says:

                    Thank you, Polycarp.

                  • Jim says:

                    That’s what most immature people do when they can’t win an argument with a fallacious position — they take theie ball and go home. I’m impressed by the masculinity and leadership you are exhibiting, Polycarp.

                  • Jim says:

                    And, for the record, we call can see that Polycarp never consented to pray for me, but just continued calling me pejorative terms with only his opinion to back up what he was asserting. I think his response of taking his ball and going home tells all who read this what type of person he is at the present time.

                  • Jim says:

                    One other reflection — I think I learned Polycarp’s definition of the word “fool” — it is anyone who disagrees with him, and who can defend their position, and when he has no answer to the other person.

                  • Jim says:

                    And one more (perhaps final) reflection: indeed, it is impossible to argue with another person when you are wrong and you refuse to see the truth. The person with the truth hopefully does not cave in, so either the person with the incorrect position changes, or indeed it is a deadend.

        • Polycarp says:

          EETN?? They gave us Msgr Clark who wasa scandal, fr. Ken Rogers another scandal, Fr Corapi and recently Fr Williams. All wonderful spokesmen in their lives for Holy Mother Church.

          • Polycarp says:

            Should have been EWTN and Ken Roberts my typo sorry.

          • Jim says:

            So, Polycarp, instead of digressing with regard to EWTN, why don’t you address some substantive issues raised yesterday? For example: (1) how you can justify calling someone an “a hole” — even though calling someone a heretic is an act of love, both for the heretic and for anyone who might be misled by the heretic; (2) how a meek and humble man (Jesus) can curse a fig tree until it withers to the ground, then finish his journey to Jerusalem where he flips over the tables of the merchants; (3) how can you justify disagreeing with Church teaching as Farley has done?

  3. Tony says:

    What a beautiful, humble statement from Sister Janet, let’s pray that both groups, talking in collaboration with each other, will call each other to credibility and move forward in their responding to the Gospel.

    • Jim says:

      Tony — the Vatican does not need credibility, so the Vatican and LCWR can not “call each other to credibility.” That’s one of your problems, Tony — you put the Vatican on an equal footing with these heretical nuns.

 
 

Leave a Comment