Archbishop urges avoidance of politics as LCWR convenes
Tags
Related Posts
About the author
As the Leadership Conference of Women Religious gathers for its annual assembly, Archbishop Robert J. Carlson of St. Louis, Mo., said that talks over the Vatican’s report of the group should stay within the context of the Church and not be politicized.
“I realize this is a most important meeting for you and I pray that the dialogue between the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith and LCWR is not politicized,” Archbishop Carlson said, “but worked out within a community of faith.”
Archbishop Carlson, who provided remarks at the Aug. 7 opening day of the LCWR’s annual assembly in St. Louis, said that while he is grateful for the “extraordinary work” of the women religious in his archdiocese, he hopes for a “resolution to the challenges” facing them.
An archdiocesan press release clarified that his remarks are not meant to show support for the content of the assembly, but rather serve as an indicator of his “doctrinal concern for the Holy See.”
The LCWR, which is made up of leaders from 1,500 women’s religious congregations throughout the U.S., made headlines in April 2012 when the Vatican called for a reform following a four year “doctrinal assessment,” which concluded found a “crisis” of belief throughout the group.
Amid the recent controversy, the archbishop called himself “fortunate” to have been able to work with so many members of religious communities throughout St. Louis and praised their contribution to the local community.
“These are dedicated individuals who minister and serve everyday in this archdiocese,” he said.
The annual meeting will feature author Barbara Marx Hubbard of the Foundation for Conscious Evolution. [More]
SOURCE
CNA/EWTN News
Leave a Comment
Photo Archive
-
May 17, 2013 5:43
Archbishop clarifies remarks about Cuomo
-
May 17, 2013 5:40
Fr. Gary Meier goes public with clergy experience
-
May 17, 2013 5:37
Predator priests paid to pray for unsuspecting families
-
May 16, 2013 1:56
Cleanup of Bridgeport, Conn., diocese begins in earnest
-
May 16, 2013 1:38
Archbishop Presses Cuomo Over Abortion
-
May 16, 2013 1:26
Deal reached in Catholic lawsuit
-
May 16, 2013 1:13
N.Y. matriarch moves closer to sainthood
-
May 16, 2013 1:07
Alvare talk on women, religious freedom, draws hundreds to seminary
-
May 15, 2013 2:31
US bishops announce 2nd Fortnight for Freedom
-
May 15, 2013 2:15
Black clergy call for abortion investigations, chastise NAACP, CBC for ignoring life issue
54 Comments
Interesting I did not see o n e nun in the picture on my screen I only saw a bunch of screaming femanist. There are many REAL nuns in America. One order is the “Order of St. Cecilia” and if you have met them you will know what REAL nuns are. Oh, and did I mention that they all wear the habit, live in community and study years before teaching? These nuns are married to the Church, as should all nuns be.
Who is kidding whom? The Bishop is playing politics!
It is apparent that we are a divided church in America as the devide between the consertives and the liberals gos on. The religious sister have chosen to live the gospel of service to the poor and have accomplished much. Rome is concerned that many of them have not spoken out in defence of Tradional marriage, Homosexuality, and male priesthood. Most female religious that I have spoken to believe that woman should be ordained Bishops, priest, and deacons. and carry the resentment in their hearts. How Rome is going to force these religious sisters to conform to rome’s laws is the question. Religious life is dying off as the laity take their place as church. We have lost 70% percent of catholic in America, the catholics curently attending mass all have gray hair and are dieing off. I have seen the raise and fall of the Roman Empire.
Are they really gonna change this wesite to CATHNEWSACCORDING TO JIM. USA.COM?
[...] http://www.cathnewsusa.com/2012/08/archbishop-urges-avoidance-of-politics-as-lcwr-convenes/ [...]
Jim, an “assertion” is simply that: an assertion. It is not doctrine. While you are so ready to call others, including these nuns, “heretics” I don’t find much Christian charity in your numerous remarks, many of which are completely off the point. You seem to hold yourself out as some expert on everything. Why don’t you try a little humility, have some real doubts, and don’t think that everything has been absolutely and immutably settled.
Rob — here’s the answer — I DON’T doubt anything the Church teaches. Why are you suggesting doubt to me? Working with the evil one, are you? And, with regard to “Christian charity” — there are at least three documented instances where that great saint with a true devotion to the Blessed Mother, Louis de Montfort, literally physically beat people up who were mocking the Church or doing impure things. Also, Jesus Himself cursed a fig tree that wasn’t producing, causing it to die; He flipped over the tables of the merchants in the temple; and he called some “vipers.” Was that Christian charity? And, with regard to assertions being doctrines — my goodness, I never claimed they were, so why are you setting up a straw man argument here? If I meant “doctrine,” I would have said “doctrine,” and if I say “assertion,” I mean just that, “assertion.” Do you have a problem with me saying what I mean? And, with regard to “many” of my remarks being “completely off the point” — since they are so numerous as you claim, find me just one that is “completely off the point.” Tell me the thread, the date and time of my post.
Perhaps Louie would have beat you up for teaching in this website that Eastern Orthodox Orders, and Eucharist were invalled. You don’t have all the answers Jim.
Tony — I never claimed I know everything; rather, you and others have claimed that I claim that I am high and mighty and a know-it-all (I believe that was your characterization of me, Tony). So, no, never said I knew everything; I do know a lot, but knowing a lot and knowing everything are two very different things.
Read very carefully the Theology of the Body by Blessed Pope John Paul II and see his vision of cooperating of the sexes. Read how St Paul says the is no male or female but all are one in Christ Jesus. Women and men are to work in collaboration with one another not in dominance of one over the other.
Tony — you who have a master’s degree in theology — are you not aware that our gender follows us for all eternity? You are not asserting that Jesus is a man/woman in Heaven, are you? And, you’re not asserting the Blessed Mother is a man/woman, are you? Of course men and women work in cooperation. Men were made by God to lead women, and that is part of how we cooperate. You can’t have two captains of a ship; one needs to yield to the other.
I stumbled on this page quite by accident. Quite a chuckle there Jim, Ol boy. Quite a chuckle.
What would the Sneetches do?
Jim, What do you mean by out. Is it out of the good old boy’s club. I don’t think it would br wise to ec communicate the majority of consecrated, vowed religious women do you.
If these errant heretics do not recant their statements, they have excommunicated themeselves. Whether or not the Church formally excommunicates them is another matter. If I were pope, I would excommunicate the leaders of these heretics like “sister” Farley. The faithful need to know that Church dogma is not negotiable, and if the Vatican does not excommunicate them, it gives the impression to the average Catholic that what these heretics are saying is acceptable. With regard to the issue of excommunicating all memebers of the LCWR: I wouldn’t do that, but I would excommunicate all the leaders that espouse heretical doctrines. I have read that the majority of the LCWR do NOT support what the LCWR are doing. So, by implication, they are on board with the Church, and they certainly should not be excommunicated.
And, Joe, I take exception to your denigration of men in your statement that it is a “good old boys club.” Is there something wrong with an all-male club? And, with regard to the Church, is there something wrong with God’s plan to have the leaders of the Church all be male? You have a problem with what God does?
No Jim I have a problem with intolerance. The hub of every family is the wife/mother. dad can only be the leader in that light
So, Joe, you seem to be saying I am intolerant, so tell me of what you think I am intolerant. And, BTW, I don’t dispute that women are the heart of the home; in fact, in prior posts, I have explicitly acknowledged this exact thing, as it was said by Pius XI in his 1930 encyclical, Castii Connubii.
Intoleremt that you condem and brand excommunicate very early. Let this play out Rome made their call, the nuns will respond let’s see what happens when the dust settles
Of course I condemn those who do things at variance with Church teachings, Joe — any faithful Catholic with a little backbone would do that (well, more correctly, this is where you need men to take the lead. Women often are too concerned with not upsetting others to speak the truth so directly.) Further, rather than excommunication being a punishment, instead it is a real blessing — a blessing for those excommunicated, as it lets them know clearly that they are in error, and that if they continue on the path they are on, it might lead to their eternal destruction. That is an absolute gift to them. Excommnication of heretics also is a blessing for the faithful, as it helps them to not be confused by the false teachings of these heretics. Remember, Jesus told us to not lead children astray, that it would be better to have a millstone tied around our neck and be thrown into a lake than to mislead the children. These heretics are misleading others, and they are in grave error.
Your definition of a man must be very interesting i can tell you it is more than a backbone.I sure hope you talk about all this with a spiritual director
Joe — unfortunately, many of the priests in the Church today are pusillanimous — they are afraid of offending others, including in particular the women, as women will for sure complain when they are offended, so typically they sanitize their homilies and as a result do not challenge anyone. When is the last time you heard the words “Hell” or “Purgatory” from the pulpit? When is the last time you heard a priest preach about the need for frequent Reconciliation? I once, as respectully as I could, challenged a priest after Mass about his homily when the Matthew 7:13-14 had been read in the Gospel that day, verses that deal with Hell, and I asked him why he mentioned nothing at all about hell in his homily. He answered that he used to do that when he was younger, but that people in the pews complained, so he stopped doing it. That, Joe, is a sin of omission. If St. Louis de Montfort or Padre Pio were alive today, I would love to have them as my spiritual director; or, a faithful Father John Corapi.
But Joe, while women consistently get recognition for their role as the heart of the family, men are routinely denigrated for doing what God has called them to do, which is to lead the family. You cannot have a heart of a family when the family is fractured by a lack of leadership. Quit ducking your responsiblity as a man and lead your wife, Joe.
no duck Jim there are realities. Men should never have left the farm for the cities and work during the industrial revolution and left the task of raising a family including sons to be men. I have 5 adukt children and my wife and I have a great understanding about our responsibilities collectively and individually thank you
Glad to hear that, Joe. If I understand your 11:47 post correctly, you are stating that only a man can make a boy into a man, and I agree whole-heartedly.
I don’t my dad died in 1953 I was 2 1/2 my sister was 11 mos old and my yougest sister was 3 weeks old. Mom was old school and didn’t remarry she di a great job for the 3 of us,
no response Jim
Joe, my goodness, give me a moment, would you? You know, I have Tony on my Eastern front, and a collection of others on my western front, so I can’t be everywhere at once. And, as I told Tony in an earlier post, I simply can’t spend the better part of another day posting on this blog — I am most definitely not retired, and I have way too many things that need my attention.
But, my response to your 12:09 P.M. post: I am sorry that you did not have your Dad there for you. And, back then, there was good discipline, and mothers often did what they needed to do in bringing up their children, both the boys and the girls. God bless your mother for doing what had to be done.
But, I think, through the fault of no one, boys who are raised in father-absent homes suffer in some ways.
This has been empirically shown in a mxltxtude of studies.
Also, it has been empirically demonstrated that males who are surrounded by mostly other males are less likely to have SSA and to have a more secure masculine idxntxty. Frankly, I think this is just common sense — it is much easier to imitate someone I live with (my father) than a man I do not live with. Finally, women, because they are women, simply can’t challenge males the way they need to be challenged. This has been demonstrated in studies of divorced families: mothers often can manage their daughters post-divorce, but they don’t manage their sons very well. And, another factor is that males simply respond to other males better than they do to females. I have observed this to be the case in countless situations over the years of my life. And, I know it is true for me — if a man tells me something, I am much more likely to listen to it and respond to it than if a woman tells me the same thing.
And again you reference studies without linking to them. Please link to them so that we may review their methodologies, as is appropriate in both a scientific and a logical system.
But if you just invent whatever studies your ideology needs without linking to them, how are we supposed to argue with somebody who just makes up their own facts?
Blag — frankly, it’s getting a little old you questioning my truthfulness. And, last time I checked, I’m not on your payroll. Nor am I a Democrat on the government dole — I have a family to support. But, I will provide at least one reference for you; it is not available online, so you’ll have to go to a library, or order it from Amazon.com. The following in quotes is paraphrased from Gilder G (1986). Men and Marriage. Gretna, LA: Pelican, pages 119-120: “Evidence for the beneficence of gender boundaries includes the fact that homosexuality is rare at most single-sex prep schools and military academies, where the masculinity of boys, especially those with greater problems in gender identification, is reinforced by the all-male environment.” Now, Blag, let’s not have a double standard here — you are so demanding that I produce my references, but I have yet to see you produce one yourself; nor have I yet to see you ask anyone else to produce references. In the future, if you don’t believe me, too bad — don’t read my posts — I don’t care.
I don’t think anyone has a problem with what God does….but rather with mans interpretation with what God oes. You are wrong Jim
Thanks for your detailed documentation to back up your assertion that I am wrong, Tony. Also, your post doesn’t even specify that about which you think I am wrong. “You are wrong, Jim” — almost like you are delirious, are on your deathbed, can’t think a straight thought, but one thing you do know for sure: that I am wrong. If the Martians came to Earth and beamed you up into their spaceship, the first thing you would tell their captain is, “Jim is wrong.”
I’m impressed, Tony. You’ve convinced me.
A child would conclued that I think you are wrong in claim for male domination as being from God. It is you who are delirious not me and the others on this site. Are we perhaps, getting to you?
Truly — and I am not dissembling here — your 11:46 post made me chuckle. Getting to me? You have water pistols, Tony, and I have nuclear weapons. Besides trying to lead others to the truth, I am posting for three other reasons: (1) this is a very interesting study in the irrationality of huamn behavior; (2) this is batting practice for me — it helps me know how some others respond to my public pronouncements in my public life; (3) this is entertainment for me. It is like playing a game of chess with a four-year-old. What makes it interesting to me is not that I win, but rather that the four-year-olds keep taunting me that I can’t beat them at the game. Truly remarkable.
Hey, that’s good that you think you win because any logical 3rd grader could tell that you don’t know the first thing about logic and rationality (or at least you haven’t yet espoused any in our dealings) but you know everything about who the Catholic church considers believers and who it does not – even more than some of the priests who have commented. You seem to know more about being told what to believe than thinking for yourself and critically analyzing life. But hey, that’s okay, just vote the way your church tells you to vote and it will all be okay!
Blag — well, here is another subjective impression of yours — from the man who prides himself on data and evidence. I don’t have a problem with you offering your opinion, but at least be logical, Mr. Logical Bat — at least acknowledge that it is just your opinion.
And Blag, to be more specific: you said I have not demonstarted any capability for logic in my posts, yet, since I have made a ton of posts, one would think you would provide the evidence from at least one of my posts that supports your contention that I am illogical. ESPECIALLY from the man who insists I provide documentation of being called a misogynyst; a man who demands external references for my statements; a man who wields the “logial bat.” Honestly, Blag, if yo u could see yourself for how you come across — that would be priceless. You know how everyone is afraid to tell the emperor that his pants are down, so people let him walk around like that? Well, I’m not like that, Blag — I’m going to tell you — your pants are down, and it’s not pretty.
Hey Jim, did you notice the place where I said “you seem”? That was where I pointed out the fact that it was my opinion. If you can’t understand that, then maybe you shouldn’t be insulting others for not understanding things so much.
I cannot, though, waste the better part of another day posting on this site. I am addicted at this point, like to a soap opera. I have to get off this ride, because truly I am neglecting my real-world responsibilities. If I do not respond to one of your posts, please do not take my silence as agreement.
The LCWR has been handed a Roman mandate which is quintessentially political in itself, as it seeks to CONTROL the LCWR and its relationship to governments and government agencies, as well as to groups inside and outside the visible church.
Seen in that context, Archbishop Carlson’s remarks to the LCWR reflect the surreal, mediaeval Roman mindset which sees threats, errors and even heresy just about everywhere but in the sacramentally consecrated cranium of a bishop, or a cardinal who happens not to be a bishop.
That’s politics. The LCWR knows that, despite all the hints and assurances to the contrary. We can be sure that LCWR’s response will reflect the work of GRACE which is nothing less than the indwelling Spirit of the Most Holy One.
Will that be sign enough for the all-male Inquisition that would CONTROL what God herself can or cannot do?
Florian — your assertion that Rome “seeks to CONTROL the LCWR and its relationships to governments and government agencies” is complete speculation on your part.
The word “control” in this context implies an abusive relationship, but Rome is not being abusive at all.
They simply are saying to these errant heretics that either you stop spouting things at variance with the unchanging dogma of the Church, or we will have to warn the public that you are not Catholic. Stop inferring motives for the Roman hierarchy, Florian, and stay with the facts.
Why is not being Catholic something anybody should care about? I would say it is more important to delve into topics, learn what previous thinkers have thought on the topic, and analyze it for yourself than to mindlessly attempt to justify your own beliefs with Catholic teachings.
I that respect, it doesn’t matter what you believe, so long as you are following your conscience – something the Catholic church teaches people to do.
It’s also hilarious to see you preaching at people to stop inferring motives and stick to facts when you love to infer dastardly motives for anybody who disagrees with you or your (Catholic) beliefs. Get a grip.
Wrong, Blag — Mr. “Logical Bat.” Go consult the Catechism — now, I’ve just provided a reference for you. I did this about a week or two ago for another poster, but I am not now going to dig out the precise paragraphs from the Catechism for you, but you can use the index to look it up. In essence, the Catechism clearly states that one’s conscience must be “properly formed” — i.e., you’re not the Lone Ranger figuring out what you think is right; rather, you look at what the Church teaches, and use that as a definitive guide in making a judgment about the current circumstance confronting you. So, Blag, in is unequivocally clear that your 5:34 P.M. post departs from what is in the Catechism. Now, maybe you want to start your own church, with your own dogma — go right ahead, but I most definitely will not be joining you. Your “church” will die out when you die.
We need a St. Louis de Montfort here, who will say what needs to be said to these errant heretics, no tip-toeing around: either get back on board with the Church, sisters, or YOU ARE OUT.
How fast you are to label these good women Heretics. These Sisters live and breath the Gospel in all that the say and do.
The male dominated church forgets that an apostleis one who is sent, and that Mary Of Magdala was sent by the rein savior to announce the resurrection to the others. Yes we have women apostles and today they are represented in the Sisters.
Garbage, Tony. When these heretics “breathe” things that are in direct variance with teachings of the Church, they are heretics. Go to dictionary.com, Tony, insert the word “heretic”, and see what comes up.
With regard to “male domination” — if you mean male leadership, well, apparently you are smarter than God, because it was God’s exact plan to make men to be the leaders. See Pius XI’s Castii Connubii for documentation of this assertion of male headship.
She is referred to as “apostle to the apostles.” Her image brings back needed balance in the church between male and female. St. Paul’s “neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, woman nor man” was an early baptismal formula in the church which he adopted and which recognized the equality of both men and women and all who were commited to following Jesus. The Vatican and the sisters will come to terms. Thanks for your post.
Thanks for your post Tony.