LCWR Press
Release
LCWR Board June 1, 2012
The national board of the
Leadership Conference of Women
Religious
(LCWR) held a special meeting in Washington, DC from May 29-31 to review, and
plan a response to, the report issued to LCWR by the Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith.
The
board members raised concerns about both the content of the doctrinal assessment
and the process by which it was prepared. Board members concluded that the
assessment was based on unsubstantiated accusations and the result of a flawed
process that lacked transparency. Moreover, the sanctions imposed were
disproportionate to the concerns raised and could compromise their ability to
fulfill their mission. The report has furthermore caused scandal and pain
throughout the church community, and created greater polarization.
The
board determined that the conference will take the following steps:
The
board recognizes this matter has deeply touched Catholics and non-Catholics
throughout the world as evidenced by the thousands of messages of support as
well as the dozens of prayer vigils held in numerous parts of the country. It
believes that the matters of faith and justice that capture the hearts of
Catholic sisters are clearly shared by many people around the world. As the
church and society face tumultuous times, the board believes it is imperative
that these matters be addressed by the entire church community in an atmosphere
of openness, honesty, and integrity.
Contact:
Sister Annmarie Sanders, IHM - LCWR Director of Communications - 301-588-4955 (office) - 301-672-3043 (cell) - asanders@lcwr.org
June
1, 2012
|
Support
the Sisters
Want to take action to support
the sisters? Visit the Nun Justice site.
 Sisters Under Scrutiny
For ongoing coverage and updates,
visit: Sisters Under Scrutiny on the National Catholic
Reporter site
Visit the Support our Catholic Sisters Facebook page. |
Vatican Declares "Year of
Assault"
John
C. Sivalon, M.M May 27, 2012
Under the guise of a "Year of Faith,"
the Vatican has launched an all-out assault on any theology or interpretation of
Vatican II based on what it calls a "Hermeneutic (Interpretation) of Rupture."
This theological assault is articulated in the document known as "Porta Fidei"
written by Benedict XVI and further specified in a document titled "Note on
Recommendations for the Implementation of the Year of Faith" which was developed
by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Both of these documents are
cited by Cardinal Levada in his statement on the doctrinal assessment of the
Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR). The rationale for that
assessment and other punitive moves that have been made in recent months
(Caritas International, educational institutes, and the Girl Scouts) must be
understood in the broader context of this special "year of assault."
The real crux of the issue
according to the "Note" is a "correct understanding" of Vatican II over against
"erroneous interpretations." Benedict likes to refer to these interpretations
as being based on a "hermeneutic of discontinuity" while referring to his own
interpretation as being based on a "hermeneutic of renewal." In truth, better
labels for these respectively, are a "hermeneutic of mission" over against
Benedict's "hermeneutic of retrenchment."
. . . .
As modern Catholics celebrate the
50th anniversary of the opening of Vatican II, we have entered into
a new chapter of church history. The Council that was declared to open the
windows is now being reinterpreted as closed shutters, protecting the Church
from the gale force winds of a world searching for spiritual authenticity.
While said to be a time of renewal, the "Year of Faith" is really dedicated to
the idolatry of doctrine, power and hierarchy. The sisters in their communal
service to the Church and world, who not only take a vow of poverty but actually
live that vow without privilege, status or accumulation of wealth are a vivid
and prophetic contrast to the inauthenticity of the call to retrenchment
masquerading as renewal.
Read more |
2 comments:
LCWR SISTERS CONFUSED ON VATICAN COUNCIL II AND THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
In their protests supporters of the LCWR Sisters have been saying that Vatican Council II has changed every thing.They mean Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and so they are into all New Age teachings and even deny the Creed.
One of the posters of an LCWR supporter says Vatican Council II cannot be changed.They interpret Vatican Council II with an irrational argument. In their religious formation they were taught that those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Explicit, known to us ? This is irrational.
They do not realize that Vatican Council II no where says that those saved in invincible ignorance etc are known to us and so they are explicit exceptions.
So how can those saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience,seeds of the Word, imperfect communion with the church etc and who are unknown to us, be an exception to the traditional interpretation of the dogma, which they reject?
Vatican Council II is a traditional Council if the 'exceptions' are considered implicit and not explicit.
It's ecclesiology is exclusive ecclesiocentrism. Ad Gentes 7 says there is exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church and all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation (to avoid Hell).AG 7 indicates all New Agers and Protestants need Catholic Faith (which includes the baptism of water) to avoid Hell.This is the message of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
The Sisters are rejecting Vatican Council II (AG 7). Then they assume LG 16 is explicit and not implicit. So they deny AG 7 and the defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
They reject an ex cathedra teaching (Cantate Domino, Council of Florence on extra ecclesiam nulla salus) and are not excommunicated like the OMI priest Fr.Tissa Balasuriya who denied the Immaculate Conception of Our Lady.
Can the LCWR sisters affirm the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, along with implicit baptism of desire and invincible ignorance ?
Cardinal William Levada, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican has not asked them to acknowledge Vatican Council II in accord with the dogma on exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church.
The dogma is in agreement with the Catechism of the Catholic Church as long as it is understood that the baptism of desire etc is always implicit for us and explicit for God.
The LCWR sisters are rejecting the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 issued during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII which referred to 'the dogma', 'the infallible statement'.
In principle there can be non Catholics saved in (implicit to us) invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire. De facto, in reality, in the present times there are no known exceptions to everyone needing to convert into the Church for salvation.
The LCWR needs to clarify its doctrinal position on the thrice defined dogma and Vatican Council II.
There are religious sisters in Worcester,USA who affirm the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and reject explicitly known baptism of desire and invincible ignorance.They affirm Vatican Council II according to Tradition.-Lionel Andrades
http://ncronline.org/blogs/all-things-catholic/exclusive-interview-levada-talks-lcwr-criticism-states
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/06/lcwr-sisters-confused-on-vatican.html#links
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
When the LCWR invites Curran, Hubbard and Schneiders they are saying the Catholic Church is not the one true Church (UR 3) and every one does not need faith and baptism for salvation (AG 7)
The Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR) is rejecting Vatican Council II (AG 7) and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.They are saying that the Catholic Church is not the sole moral authority.
Statutes are approved of a religious organization which does not believe in exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church and the literal interpretation of the dogma ? The LCWR is Catholic even when it says invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are explicit exceptions to the dogma ? Are these 'exceptions' not always implicit for the SSPX?
I have mentioned on a blog that if you invite Charles Curran to speak you are telling us all what you believe. If you openly promote New Age you are telling us what you believe. In the case of the LCWR, they represent the Church and so they are saying that this is what the Church teaches. They are also saying that there is no exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church. When you invite Barbara Marx Hubbard your message is clear. You are saying that the Catholic Church is not the one true Church (UR 3, Vatican Council II) and all people do not need Catholic faith and the baptism of water for salvation (AG 7).Your also saying that there can be an interpretation of Vatican Council II which negates AG 7.
If a Mother Superior of a community affiliated with the LCWR inquired if their community could hold the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus along with implicit baptism of desire and invincible ignorance etc in accord with Vatican Council II (AG 7), would the LCWR approve?
They would be saying that all non Catholics in 2012 need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation and if there are any exceptions,' who have not had the Gospel preached to them’ it would be known only to God.
This is not the ecclesiology of the LCWR which is centered on Jesus and excludes the Church. So an LCWR member can believe in Jesus, according to the Jehovah Witnesses, distribute sacred pictures of Jesus as they do in Rome, and teach according to their religion and still consider oneself in the Catholic Church. This would be Jesus without the Catholic Church which the Bible tells us is His Mystical Body.The LCWR rejects exclusive ecclesiocentrism.
The CDF could help the sisters by announcing that those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptisms of desire are implicit for us and only explicit for God.
It is true that only those who know about Jesus and the Church and yet do not enter are oriented to Hell (LG 14) however we cannot judge that someone is really in invincible ignorance or someone is not. This judgement is left to God.The dogma and AG 7 says all need to convert into the Church for salvation.
If anyone says Fr. Leonard Feeney was wrong for rejecting the baptism of desire they are making a mistake. The baptism of desire is not a known exception to the literal interpretation of the dogma.-Lionel Andrades
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/06/when-lcwr-invites-curran-hubbard-and.html#links
Post a Comment