U.S. nuns under investigation
November 6th, 2009, 12:48 pm · 5 Comments · posted by Mark Barna
In my Nov. 8 column in the Colorado Springs Gazette, and at www.gazette.com, I write about the Vatican’s investigation of U.S. sisterhoods, including Benet Pines and Mount St. Francis monasteries in Colorado Springs.
Some experts think the investigation is driven by U.S. sisters’ embrace of the liberal decisions of Vatican II, while priests have tended to embrace pre-Vatican II ideas, which are far more conservative.
To read what the Vatican says about the investigation, go to www.apostolicvisitation.org.
Below is an edited excerpt of my interview with a Catholic expert about the controversy.
Mary Louise Hartman is the former president of the Association for the Rights of Catholics in the Church, based in St. Louis.
MARK BARNA: Why is the Vatican investigating U.S. sisterhoods?
HARTMAN: It’s just another effort of the curia, or (Vatican) middle management, to annoy the American church. They are not happy with the way we practice Catholicism. I sense that those in the curia want to maintain the status quo of the late 19th century. They don’t want to move out of Vatican I.
BARNA: Why are U.S. nuns the focus?
HARTMAN: The nuns are more visible, active, vocal, successful.
BARNA: What bugs you the most about the inquiry?
HARTMAN: It is stupid. It was done without consultation. The process is undemocratic. They are treating these women like children. It makes it even worse that they haven’t done the same investigation of priests, especially given the pedophilia scandals. [Editor's note:About seven years ago, the Vatican investigated seminaries. The scuttlebutt at the time was that authorities were trying to root out gays within the seminaries. No results were published publicly about that investigation.]
5 Comments
Leave a Reply
- Advertising Info
- Place An Ad
- Today's Ads
- Yellow Pages
- About Us
- Contact Us
- Contact the Newsroom
- Advertise
- Community Advisory Board
- Gazette Speakers' Bureau
- Work For Us
- Community Advisory Board
- Copyright and Reprint Information
- Subscriber Services
- Subscriber Services
- Manage Print Subscription
- Pay Your Bill Online
- Vacation Stop
- Archives
- Newspaper Ads
- Buy Our Photos
- Online News Environment
- Green Edition
- E-Newsletters/ Alerts
- RSS Feeds
- Mobile
why is it necessary to write only a negative article about the Church without comments from those who believe that if the Catholic Sisterhood is in full compliance with the teachings, they have no reason to be concerned about the “investigation”. But, perhaps, it’s because there are Nums who are escorts for women seeking abortion or supporting the pro-abortion movement or vocally critizing the Church, the Pope and demanding female priests, etc. etc. etc. (One prime example of how far the liberals who call themselves Catholic have strayed is to look at those President Obama has put in high ranking government positions.)
The charge is that the Church is trying to take us back to the Middle Ages; to undercut Vatican II when, now, one can’t recognize what was intended from Vatican II with all the liberal interpretations done by many Bishops, Priests and Sisters in the US from that period. They, and their supporters, all know better than the Pope and the Magisterium.
We want our Church back. We want to know those we look to for spiritual guidance and leadership are not going against the Church’s teachings that are very clearly spelled out. That life is respected at conception, that the Pope is looked to with humility and it is in the teachings that priests are male and women have amazing responsibilies within the Church (look at Mary). If those calling themselves Catholic are so unhappy with the 2000 yr old Church, please convert to Anglican or Lutheran…how’s that going for them??
I was employed by the Catholic Archdiocese of Baltimore about 30 years ago as a lay youth and young adult minister. I came to know, and work with many priests and sisters. At the time, it was pretty clear that the nuns were practicing their vows and living prayerful lives far moreso than the priests. As I think back on that time, I cannot recall knowing a priest well who was celibate, either straight or gay; I cannot recall knowing a sister who wasn’t.
Ms. Davis’ comment about toeing the magisterial line is just so much reactionary bunk. As American Catholics, we get to use our minds within the Church to raise questions and to ask for better preaching, better role models, better liturgical music, rather than just “pray, pay and obey”. Her attitude is just like the “America - love it or leave it” dogmatism that attempted to avoid dealing with the Viet Nam war. Love the Church? Absolutely. Without questioning? Absolutely not.
I too was upset about Mr. Barna’s very one-sided and negative article. My first thought is that he is not truly familiar with Vatican II. Since Vatican II, there have been two different perspectives on its meaning. The first is of a group that wants to disconnect from 2,000 years of Christian Tradition maintained by the Western and Eastern Apostolic Churches. The other group wants to implement the reforms in continuity with the historic and Apostolic Church.
The second problem is that while most nuns (80%) belong to the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR), only 20% of the women entering religious orders enter into women’s religious orders that are part of LCWR. However, the traditional orders of women religious, those that still wear the traditional habits and live in convents and are part of The Council of Major Superiors of Women Religious CMSWR), receive 80% of the women who have decided to dedicate there lives to serving Christ. These orders follow the teachings of the Catholic Church instead of their own agendas.
I believe that Mr. Barna and the women of LCWR need to ask themselves why most young women entering religious orders want nothing to do with the orders that are part of LCWR. Could it be their lack of respect for the Church and their desire to push the own agendas?
Mark, how about contacting the CMSWR and getting and printing the other side of the story?
Hello to Jo Davis and Rick Lentz,
I wish to point out that my piece on U.S. nuns was a column, an opinion, and not a news story, which is why both sides are not presented.
However, before I wrote the column, I did examine both sides but found myself siding with Catholic leaders who are distraught over the investigation. In my column, I quote a sister, a seminary leader and others to bolster my point.
Jo Davis and Rick Lentz are also presenting their opinions above. They just happen to disagree with my opinion, and they aren’t presenting any outside experts to bolster their respectrive thesis.
But this dialogue is good and what these boards are all about.
Mark Barna
Gazette Religion Reporter
There may be other women, like myself, who’ve been mistaken for nuns. The laity can see good works and often mistake those who do them as nuns who wear no habit. It has never upset me to be mistaken as a nun or former nun. Indeed, I think this speaks to the fact that a “habit” does not “prove” anyone’s membership in the Kingdom - of Kindness. Actually it is proof that people have great respect for all that the sisters do. And mistaking people like me for a sister only makes their numbers appear larger than they are! Don’t mess with a good thing, say I.