Wednesday, April 18, 2012

Leadership Conference of Women Religious Taken to the Wood Shed

“The current doctrinal and pastoral situation of the LCWR is grave and a matter of serious concern.”

A spectacular development.

“Further,” the CDF report said, “issues of crucial importance in the life of the Church and society, such as the Church’s Biblical view of family life and human sexuality, are not part of the LCWR agenda in a way that promotes Church teaching. Moreover, occasional public statements by the LCWR that disagree with or challenge positions taken by the Bishops, who are the Church’s authentic teachers of faith and morals, are not compatible with its purpose.”

The CDF said, “The Assessment reveals serious doctrinal problems which affect many in Consecrated life,” calling it a crisis “characterized by a diminution of the fundamental Christological center and focus of religious consecration.”


They must have the vapors at America Magazine and Vox Nova?

This is priceless.

Investigators cited a speech by Sister Laurie Brink at an annual assembly that argued that religious sisters were “’moving beyond the church’ or even beyond Jesus.”


Thus ending the charade.

Moving beyond the Church and Jesus?

How does something like that come out of your mouth without being absolutely horrified at what you're saying?


I love this:

“I’m stunned,” said Sister Simone Campbell, executive director of Network, a Catholic social justice lobby founded by sisters.


Oh, come on lady. Really?

Did you ever think you'd see the day when Cardinal Leveda would take the bulls by the horns?

I'm giddy.

One minor little grievance...

In programs and presentations, investigators noted “a prevalence of certain radical feminist themes incompatible with the Catholic faith.”


Anyone care to venture a guess as to why the CDF would publish such a forthright assessment of the women religious whilst Cardinal O'Malley has gotten away with a 7 year reign of theological terror with radical feminist themes incompatible with the Catholic faith and dismantling the 2000 year old structure of the Roman Catholic Church without so much as a peep from the Vatican?

It isn't from lack of complaints. There's been tens of thousands of complaints filed by Boston Catholics.

How about lining up the Jesuits?

They certainly have their work cut out ahead of them, don't they.

10 comments:

StevenD-Jasper said...

On their social justice page, the LCWR talks about the importance of recycling ink cartridges, no mention of chopped up unborn babies though. Carol Keehan
recieved their outstanding leadership award. The good news is that all of them have gray hair now. Could not find one nun in full habit.


In other news, the humble capuchin has no less than 35 pictures of himself this week on his blog

Maria said...

How many decades have we been waiting for rhis? It is too wonderful for words!!!!

Jo Anne said...

Draining the swamp does reveal the alligators!

In this case the alligator's vision is not so sharp and neither are the few remaining teeth.

Maria said...

LOL, Jo Anne. I have heard that several Jesuits have suffered apoplexy at America Mag, Carol ;) Their house of cards is falling down.

Jack O'Malleyddavi an said...

Post title: LCWR taken to the woodshed.

Call me cynical, but I'll bet that coven of aging dykes relishes the thought of the woodshed.

Oops, sinned again in thought and word. At least not this time in deed. Do they make a distinction anymore in the novus ordo seclorum religion?

Domine Iesu Christe, Fili Dei, miserere mei peccatoris. (Prex Iesu, Prex cordis)

Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me a sinner. (The Jesus Prayer, Prayer of the heart)

A blessed Bright Week to our liturgically pristine brethren in Orthodoxy! May the Oriental Light illumine the darkened West.

Jack O'Malley said...

I have no idea how those extra letters got suffixed to my name. Wandering bytes in cyberspace? Scary in a way. Maybe it's a Hindu incantation that the Chancery has hacked into Catholic bloggers?

I'm taking no chances. Oooommmmmm. Oooommmmm. Oooommmm.

Hey, Seáno! Come on over and have a beer and let's listen to Ravi Shankar. Bring Mary La Grassa along too. Nice girl but seriously overpaid. I'll show her a couple of yoga positions that Ed Peters might dig up a canon against. Naaah. They are hetero so his bishop will nix it.

Maria said...

Jack: Can I bring my crystals? My "lived experience" tells me that the Holy Spirit, well, She moves in, and through, them. We can divine ennegrams for each other. And then, we will have "centering prayer". No priests allowed. Holy Mother Church no longer needs the strictures imposed by priests. We are free, Jack.

PS Could you ask your wife to bring me some lipstick. I am all out. Tell your wife--my favorite color is "Attitude".Oh, and some costume jewlery.

See you there. All is "gift", Jack. All is "gift".

Carol said...

Way too funny.

Jack - The pagan stuff is all of a sudden coming out of the woodwork. It's actually getting worse under Monsignor Deeley? A real headscratcher.

Steve, you confirmed the median age of the gals.

Maria - Do you think the cleaning of the pig pen at the LCWR has the Jezzies nervous?

Maria said...

Carol--We can hope and pray, right?
I must confess, I am loving this. If the Bishops only knew how many women are 110 % behind them, they would never shut up! I say: go tell it on the mountain!!!

Catholic Mission said...

Thursday, June 21, 2012
If the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 said that the baptism of desire was an exception to the dogma they made a mistake: So why cannot the Leadership Conference of Women Religious hold the literal interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus along with implicit baptism of desire ?


Extra ecclesiam nulla salus is at the centre of the LCWR problems e.g. in her LCWR keynote address in 1997 Sr. Sandra Schneider(1) said " It can no longer be taken for granted that the members [of a given congregation] share the same faith.” Why, because they don’t believe in the dogma?


In an LCWR keynote speech in 2007 Sr. Laurie Brink, O.P. spoke of “four different general ‘directions’ in which religious congregations seem to be moving.” She said that “not one of the four is better or worse than the others.” One of the directions described is “sojourning,” which she says “involves moving beyond the Church, even beyond Jesus. The Church is not necessary for salvation?


LCWR speakers also explore themes…that are frequently ambiguous, dubious or even erroneous with respect to Christian faith writes Bishop Leonard P. Blair.(2)The errors and ambiguity are there because they do not believe in the dogma on exclusive salvation being there in only the Catholic Church.


The speaker in August is Sr. Schneider since the LCWR do not believe in the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.They probably assume like so many Catholics, influenced by the secular media, that the Church no more teaches this dogma. They believ Cardinal Francesco Marchetti-Selvaggiani in the Letter of the Holy Office suggested that the baptism of desire is an exception to the literal interpretation of the dogma. So the sisters write off the dogma and Vatican Council II (AG 7).


In other words a cardinal can overrule an ex cathedra dogma (Cantate Domino, Council of Florence etc) and also Vatican Council II.


If Cardinal Francesco Marchetti-Selvaggiani assumed that Fr. Leoanrd Feeney was wrong because he denied the baptism of desire then the cardinal made a mistake. Since the baptism of desire is irrelevant to the dogmatic teaching. It is always implicit.


So there is nothing which prevents the LCWR affirming the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus along with implicit-to-us and explicit-to-God baptism of desire, invincible ignorance, a good conscience and being saved with the ‘seeds of the word’.


When the LCWR affirms the literal interpretation of the salvation dogma Sr. Schneider will appear heretical.The LCWR would be able to support their views with Vatican Council II (AG 7) while there is no text in Vatican Council II which Sr. Schneider could use, as a reference for her teachings.The LCWR would be faithful to the Magisterium of the centuries, to Vatican Council II and magisterial teachings like Dominus Iesus 20 and the Catechism of the Catholic Church 845,846.
-Lionel Andrades
1.
http://wdtprs.com/blog/2012/06/sr-sandra-schneiders-nunthink-or-why-the-cdf-is-picking-on-the-nuns/

2.
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/06/reality-check-lcwr-cdf-and-doctrinal.html