Vatican censors nun’s book on sexual ethics
After two years of study, the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith published a “notification” on Farley’s Just Love: A Framework for Christian Sexual Ethics, saying it contradicts Catholic doctrine on key issues such as gay marriage, homosexuality and divorce.
Coming just days after U.S. nuns rejected the Vatican’s reasoning for a wholesale makeover, and a year after U.S. bishops sanctioned another nun theologian, the condemnation of Farley is the latest example of what critics see as a top-down attempt to muzzle women’s voices and an obsession on sexual ethics.
The condemnation comes just three days after Seattle Archbishop J. Peter Sartain, who has been appointed by the Vatican to oversee the reform of the largest umbrella organization of Catholic sisters in the U.S., extended what appeared to be an olive branch to the nuns.
Sartain said that he wanted to work to reform the Leadership Conference of Women Religious “in an atmosphere of openness, honesty, integrity and fidelity to the Church’s faith,” and said the Vatican and American bishops were “deeply proud of the historic and continuing contribution” of nuns in education and health care.
But his conciliatory tone was quickly overshadowed by the new condemnation issued by Rome on yet another American nun.
The “notification” says Farley’s book “ignores” or “contradicts” Catholic teaching, presenting it as “one opinion among others,” and warned that it should not be “used as a valid expression of Catholic teaching, either in counseling and formation, or in ecumenical and interreligious dialogue.” The “notification” was approved by Pope Benedict XVI on March 16.
The Vatican’s doctrinal office singled out masturbation, homosexuality and marriage as specific areas of concern in Just Love.
For example, Farley writes that “masturbation … usually does not raise any moral questions at all,” and that homosexual acts “can be justified” following the same ethics as heterosexual ones. The Vatican statement retorts that “masturbation is an intrinsically and gravely disordered action” and that homosexual acts are “intrinsically disordered” and “contrary to natural law.”
Farley also voices doubts over the “indissolubility” of marriage, and argues that laws recognizing gay marriage can play an important part in reversing widespread “hatred … and stigmatization of gays and lesbians,” a position that is “opposed to the teaching of the magisterium,” according to the Vatican.
Published in 2006, Just Love has received widespread praise from Christians of all denominations and has been used as a textbook in college courses on sexual ethics. For it, Farley won the prestigious Grawemeyer Award for Religion from Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary in 2008.
Farley, a member of the Sisters of Mercy, taught at Yale from 1971 to 2007.
In a statement, Farley acknowledged that some of her positions are “not in accord with current official Catholic teaching,” but stressed that her book’s intent was to present a modern “framework for sexual ethics” drawing on the input of current experience and different religious traditions.
Farley, who was the first woman professor and one of the first Catholics to teach at Yale Divinity School, says she is convinced that her positions “reflect a deep coherence with the central aims and insights” of Christian theology and tradition, and contends that the Vatican ignored the reasons and context that led to her conclusions.
Other Catholic theologians seem to agree. M. Shawn Copeland, a theology professor at Boston College called the Vatican notification “deeply disappointing and most disturbing,” saying that Farley’s research is “notable” for its “distinguishing of practical and speculative questions from magisterial or official teaching.”
Paul Lakeland, director of the Center for Catholic Studies at Fairfield University, called Farley a “careful and caring” theologian, and said “it is the vocation of Catholic theologians and ethicists to work on the boundaries” of current doctrine.
The notification on Farley’s book comes in the wake of last year’s controversial condemnation of feminist theologian Sister Elizabeth Johnson by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, and seems to be part of an effort to rein in theologians who stray too far from the path of Catholic orthodoxy.
In March, a Vatican panel stated that while “investigation and questioning” by theologians are “justified and even necessary” the final word on the “authentic interpretation” of the Catholic faith ultimately belongs to bishops.
Vatican Scolds Nun for Book on Sexuality
The Vatican office, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, said that the book, “Just Love: A Framework for Christian Sexual Ethics,” by Sister Margaret A. Farley, was “not consistent with authentic Catholic theology,” and should not be used by Roman Catholics.
Sister Farley, a past president of the Catholic Theological Society of America and an award-winning scholar, responded in a statement: “I can only clarify that the book was not intended to be an expression of current official Catholic teaching, nor was it aimed specifically against this teaching. It is of a different genre altogether.”
The book, she said, offers “contemporary interpretations” of justice and fairness in human sexual relations, moving away from a “taboo morality” and drawing on “present-day scientific, philosophical, theological, and biblical resources.”
The formal censure comes only weeks after the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued a stinging reprimand of the main coordinating organization of American nuns, prompting many Catholics across the country to turn out in defense of the nuns with protests, petitions and vigils.
The nuns’ organization, the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, said on Friday that its board had declared that the Vatican’s accusations were “unsubstantiated,” and that it was sending its leaders to Rome to make its case. Three bishops have been appointed by the Vatican to supervise an overhaul of the nuns’ organization.
The censure of Sister Farley, who belongs to the Sisters of Mercy of the Americas, is the second time recently that a book by an American nun has been denounced by the church’s hierarchy. In 2011, the doctrine committee of United States bishops condemned “Quest for the Living God: Mapping Frontiers in the Theology of God,” by Sister Elizabeth A. Johnson, a professor of theology at Fordham University in New York.
The Vatican’s doctrinal office, led by an American, Cardinal William J. Levada, has spent more than two years reviewing Sister Farley’s book, which was published in 2006. The office first notified Sister Farley’s superior of its concerns in March 2010, and said it had opened a further investigation because a response she had sent to the Vatican in October 2010 had not been “satisfactory.” It said her book had “been a cause of confusion among the faithful.”
The dean of Yale Divinity School, Harold W. Attridge, a Catholic layman, and the president of the Sisters of Mercy, Sister Patricia McDermott, issued statements in support of Sister Farley. So did 15 fellow scholars who, in a document released by the divinity school, testified to Sister Farley’s Catholic credentials and the influence she has had in the field of moral theology.
Cardinal Levada’s statement about the book, dated March 30 but released on Monday, said that it “cannot be used as a valid expression of Catholic teaching, either in counseling and formation, or in ecumenical and interreligious dialogue.” The statement said Pope Benedict XVI had approved its contents and ordered its publication. It comes as the Vatican struggles to contain a controversy over leaked documents that showed infighting and mismanagement in the papacy of Benedict XVI, who on Sunday concluded a three-day meeting in Milan to promote family values.
The Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, said the Vatican had not called for any sanctions against Sister Farley and was not expected to do so because she has retired from teaching.
Sister Farley’s book finds moral and theological justifications for same-sex marriage, which aside from abortion, has become the major galvanizing political and moral issue for American bishops. The statement took Sister Farley to task for writing that same-sex marriage “can also be important in transforming the hatred, rejection, and stigmatization of gays and lesbians.” She wrote that “same-sex relationships and activities can be justified according to the same sexual ethic as heterosexual relationships and activities.”
“This opinion is not acceptable,” the Vatican statement said. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, it said, says homosexual acts are “acts of grave depravity” that are “intrinsically disordered” and “contrary to the natural law.” It said that Sister Farley’s assertion that sometimes divorce is a reasonable option for couples who have grown apart contradicted church teaching on the “indissolubility of marriage.”
The statement quoted liberally from some of the racier passages in “Just Love,” including ones in which Sister Farley writes that female masturbation “usually does not raise any moral questions at all.” She adds that “many women” have found “great good in self-pleasuring — perhaps especially in the discovery of their own possibilities for pleasure — something many had not experienced or even known about in their ordinary sexual relations with husbands or lovers.”
The Vatican said this assessment contradicted church teaching that “the deliberate use of the sexual faculty, for whatever reason, outside of marriage is essentially contrary to its purpose.”
Gaia Pianigiani contributed reporting.
American nuns’ group to challenge Vatican censure
By RACHEL ZOLL, AP Religion Writer
NEW YORK (AP) — The largest umbrella group for U.S. nuns on Friday broke weeks of near-silence on a stinging Vatican report that they had undermined Roman Catholic teaching, saying the inquiry was “flawed” and based on “unsubstantiated accusations” that were causing pain throughout the church.
The Leadership Conference of Women Religious had been considering for six weeks how they should respond to the Vatican findings, which accused them of promoting “certain radical feminist themes incompatible with the Catholic faith,” while failing to emphasize core teaching on abortion. The Vatican ordered a full-scale overhaul of the organization overseen by three American bishops, a decision that has led to an outpouring of support for the nuns nationwide.
After three days of discussion and prayer, the board decided to take their concerns to a meeting June 12 in Rome with the Vatican orthodoxy watchdog, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The office in Rome is led by an American, Cardinal William Levada.
“Board members concluded that the assessment was based on unsubstantiated accusations and the result of a flawed process that lacked transparency,” the group said after a three-day meeting. “Moreover, the sanctions imposed were disproportionate to the concerns raised and could compromise their ability to fulfill their mission.”
The Vatican investigated the group for more than two years and concluded in April that the organization has “serious doctrinal problems,” including taking positions that conflict with the American bishops and undermine Catholic teaching on the all-male priesthood, marriage and homosexuality.
The nuns’ group, along with many sisters who work in health care, disagreed with the bishops’ analysis of the law and supported President Barack Obama’s plan. The report praised the group’s social justice work but said they hadn’t spoken out on abortion and other important teaching.
Vigils and protests defending the sisters have been held nationwide, including in front of the Vatican’s U.S. embassy in Washington, and have coursed through Facebook and Twitter. Last Wednesday in the Cleveland area, more than 650 people attended a rally in support of the nuns at a parish, the Plain-Dealer reported.
“The report has furthermore caused scandal and pain throughout the church community, and created greater polarization,” the board said.
On Friday, Seattle Archbishop Peter Sartain said in a brief statement that the Holy See and the bishops are “deeply proud of the historic and continuing contribution” of sisters and that he looked forward to speaking with them in Rome.
Separately, the Jesuit magazine America on Friday posted a lengthy article Sartain wrote, affirming the Vatican findings. He said changes were needed because the sisters played such an important role in the church. Training future leaders “requires thorough spiritual, theological and human formation that is firmly grounded in Catholic teaching and tradition,” Sartain wrote.
The archbishop has been given authority to oversee rewriting the statutes of the Leadership Conference, reviewing its plans and programs including approving speakers and ensuring the group properly follows Catholic prayer and ritual. The conference represents about 57,000 sisters, or 80 percent of U.S. nuns.
In a phone interview, the president of the Leadership Conference, Sister Pat Farrell, declined to comment on specifics of the report or go into detail about what the group considers the flaws in the findings. She said the organization would formally respond to the investigation following discussions with members at regional meetings and a national assembly in August.
She said that the Vatican investigation of her group — and the public backlash — reflect how polarized the church has become about what parts of Catholic teaching should be emphasized.
After the modernizing reforms of the Second Vatican Council in the 1960s, many sisters embraced Catholic teaching against war and nuclear weapons and for workers’ rights and shed their habits, while serving as hospital administrators, social workers and teachers. Many conservative Catholics have long complained that the sisters have grown too liberal and flout church teaching.
“The mood at the board meeting was one of deep, deep sadness about this document that has come from the Vatican, but there was also a spirit of deep prayer and reflection and sincere searching together,” Farrell said.
Farrell has been a sister for 47 years. She said she was “stunned at the severity” of the reprimand.
“I didn’t think I would ever see anything like this,” Farrell said. “Truthfully, I’m glad my mother is not alive to see this unfolding. She would be heartbroken.”
PostOpinions E-Newsletters
The Leadership Conference of Women Religious is not folding in the face of criticism by the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. In a tough statement today, the organization challenged both the process through which they were called on the carpet, and the content of the criticism.
Here is the key paragraph of the LCWR statement after a two-day meeting of its board:
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.
That is unusually direct language, not the sort of talk bishops are accustomed to. Significantly, the statement added that the board “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.” Note that reference to “the entire Church community.” The nuns are telling the American bishops and the Vatican that they are not prepared to settle this matter quietly, and that the Church leadership needs to take account the views of all Catholics.
Many Catholics — I am one of them — will appreciate the fact that the sisters are not simply caving in. The process was flawed and unfair. The sanctions, involving the appointment of Archbishop J. Peter Sartain of Seattle to reorganize the Conference, were disproportionate. I also think the Vatican will come to regret that it specifically associated the LCWR with “a prevalence of certain radical feminist themes incompatible with the Catholic faith.” How could the most important women in the Church structure not feel challenged to stand up for themselves in the face of such criticism from the men who hold positions of authority? Should it be surprising that women who have contributed so much to Catholicism and the world might have questions about the role of women in the Church?
One would like to hope that it is significant that Archbishop Sartain responded to the LCWR’s statement with a conciliatory statement of his own. He expressed his commitment to trying to encourage an “atmosphere of openness, honesty, integrity and fidelity to the Church’s faith.” He added: “The Holy See and the Bishops of the United States are deeply proud of the historic and continuing contribution of women religious – a pride that has been echoed by many in recent weeks. Dramatic examples of this can be witnessed in the school system and in the network of Catholic hospitals established by sisters across America which are lasting contributions to the wellbeing of our country.” Clearly, he and other bishops have been hearing from a lot of Catholics who deeply admire the work of the nuns and are not happy about the Vatican’s move. The archbishop also published an essay in America magazine, the national Jesuit weekly widely read by moderate and liberal Catholics, the bulk of which was devoted to praising the sisters.
The next move in the controversy will be a June 12 meeting in Rome involving the LCWR president and executive director, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith Prefect William Levada, and Archbishop Sartain. Afterward, the nuns group plans to “gather its members both in regional meetings and in its August assembly to determine its response to the CDF report.”
Progressives Catholics are alarmed by a lot of things these days, but I don’t think anything galvanized them like the move against the sisters. I hope the bishops are aware of how much discontent they are creating across a broad front among faithful Mass-attending Catholics who see the institution’s leadership lurching sharply to the right. Ever since I wrote a column in which I explained why I am not quitting the Church, I have heard from a lot of Catholics who are thinking of doing just that, or already have. Surely the bishops don’t want to shrink a great institution into a modest-sized sect. I’d like to hope that the Holy Spirit is operating through the nuns.
Strong Seattle support for US nuns facing Vatican-ordered crackdown
St. James Cathedral is often the scene of vigils, but the crowd outside its front door on Tuesday night was there to dissent from rather than proclaim Vatican policy:
The praying, singing gathering of Catholic was protesting the Catholic Church hierarchy’s crackdown on American nuns.
A 15-year-old Seattle Prep student named Fiona Campbell summed up what brought out the 125 people who stood beneath a stained glass window of Christ with its inscription: “I AM THE VINE AND YOU ARE THE BRANCHES.”
“The Vatican is investigating all of them,” said Campbell. “They staff hospitals and schools and orphanages. They’ve done a lot more of the church’s real work than other people who are investigating them.”
Seattle Archbishop J. Peter Sartain, whose chancery is in the next block, was recently appointed by the Vatican to make American nuns toe the line, or in the language of the hierarchy “offering guidance on the application of church doctrine.”
Sister Helen Brennan, former religious education director for the Diocese of Yakima, stood on the cathedral steps voicing both apprehension and hope. “I’m holding my breath,” she said. “He (Sartain) has held three bishoprics, which means he’s a company man. I hope he will dialogue with us and hear our story.”
A “doctrinal assessment”, released last month by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, accused the sisters of embracing “radical feminist themes incompatible with the Catholic faith.”
It took aim at the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, which represents 80 percent of the country’s 57,000 nuns. The Vatican claimed that the church’s “Biblical view of family life and human sexuality are not part of the LCWR agenda,” and that the sisters have “serious doctrinal problems.”
The Vatican’s view does not comport with what those outside St. James have seend. They argued Tuesday that the sisters do God’s grunt work, and are there from the hospital bedside to the classroom to the social justice picket line.
“Gosh, it’s bullpucky, it’s upsetting,” Theresa Litourneau said of the “assessment” by the Vatican. “I was in an orphange with nuns,” she added. “I’ve been in Harborview, and nuns came to see me. I grew up in school with nuns.”
Roger Yockey worked for years with the United Food and Commercial Workers Union (then the Retail Clerks) on civil rights and social justice issues. He was active in the Catholic Interracial Council, which confronted housing segregation and redlining of loans by Seattle banks.
“I’ve been with religious women on picket lines, in retreats, on pilgrimages,” Yockey said. “I suffered an injury when I was 4 years old. It is due to the work of a Catholic sister that I can speak here today. And you know I love to speak.”
Bev Coco, another demonstrator, remembered the inspiration of Sister Katheryn Clair who taught Coco in school years ago. “She was an example of a strong woman who wanted all women to stand up for themselves,” said Coco.
One by one, vigil participants took the microphone to praise the good works of American nuns they have known. Among those mentioned was Sister Jean Prejean, the Louisiana nun who has devoted her life to working with death row inmates. (Susan Sarandon won an Oscar for her portrayal of Prejean.)
With its guitars and folk songs, the St. James gathering evoked the era of the Second Vatican Council and Pope John XXIII, a half century ago, when the Catholic Church appeared to be opening itself to the modern world and embracing other faith traditions. Future Seattle Archbishop Raymond Hunthausen was the youngest American prelate at Vatican II.
“Secular” Seattle saw more interfaith cooperation — even a KOMO-TV program featuring a priest, a minister and a rabbi — than almost any other city in the country. A church-spawned organization, Neighbors in Need, fed Seattle’s middle class hungry during the “Boeing recession” of the early 1970′s.
Inside St. James, a shrine to Blessed John XXIII (he is a candidate for sainthood) will be installed later this year, and an anecdote from the life of the late pope graces each Sunday bulletin.
But some Catholics fear that legacy is being left behind. In the 21st Century, the Catholic hierarchy has begn to take a hard line — even toward its own.
Cardinal Raymond Burke, the head of the Vatican’s highest court, excoriated American nuns for what he called “the public and obstinate betrayal of religious life by certain religious.”
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops last week began to investigate and assess ties between Catholic parishes and the Girl Scouts. The reason is Scouts’ association with Doctors Without Borders, Oxfam and the Sierra Club — groups which have shown sympathy for family planning.
The Catholic hierarchy is also angry with American nuns for seeking accommodation with the Obama administration on inclusion of birth control in health plans offered by Catholic hospitals and universities. The bishops, by contrast, seem spoiling for a fight and denouncing what they claim are attacks on “religious liberty.”
The nation’s bishops and cardinals — and their counterparts in Rome — are not known for listening to “the branches” despite what’s written on the face of Seattle’s cathedral. Lay protest did force the Vatican to back down in the late 1980′s when it tried to strip away authority from the pacifist Archbishop Hunthausen.
It galls some of the Catholics who turned out Tuesday.
“They haven’t explained it (the crackdown on nuns),” said Don Sly. “They don’t have to. This is about power. That’s the stance of power. You can investigate someone without offering any real investigation.”
There were “Support the Sisters” vigils outside 27 cathedrals across American on Tuesday night, in locales ranging from Anchorage, Alaska, to Austin, Texas. Songs were sung outside the cathedrals of the country’s two best-known hard line bishops, Cardinal Timothy Dolan in New York and Archbishop Charles Chaput in Philadelphia.
Brennan was joined by four other religious women on the steps of St. James. The Rev. John Whitney, pastor of St. Joseph Parish, supplied the candles and prayer cards.
The vigils will continue on Tuesday nights through the month of May.
When Reverend Mothers Cease Being Motherly
Reading most press accounts of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s doctrinal assessment of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, one would think that the Vatican is attacking all of the world’s nuns.
A more correct read of the situation, however, is that the Vatican hasn’t attacked all of the Church’s nuns, but rather it has disciplined a select group of them in the U.S., and it has done so out of love for the Truth. For the past 40 years, some leaders within certain female religious communities – such as some Benedictines, Dominicans, and Franciscans – have wandered increasingly further away from Christ’s Church and her teachings.
The assessment revealed what it described as “serious doctrinal problems which affect many in Consecrated Life. … On the doctrinal level, this crisis is characterized by a diminution of the fundamental Christological center and focus of religious consecration which leads, in turn, to a loss of a ‘constant and lively sense of the Church’ among some Religious.”
Recently, Washington Post writer Lisa Miller brought the Virgin Mary into the discussion. While that is a correct approach, Miller did so in a peculiar way. Miller paints Mary as a kind of primal radical feminist.
Miller compares the imagined fury of the men of Galilee with a young, unmarried, pregnant Mary to that of the ordained men of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith issuing the doctrinal assessment and calling for reform.
“Mary was a poor girl from nowhere, living in a culture in which men made all the rules and owned all the property and women had nothing,” writes Miller. “For more than a thousand years, women like Mary have entered religious life hoping to find a safe place where they might receive an education and protection from the oppression of marriage and the dangers of child-bearing.”
Miller demonstrates an utter lack of understanding about the role of religious women and Marian femininity. Most religious women enter religious life not out of some fear of marriage or child-bearing. Rather, they sacrifice physical marriage to become the spouse of Christ. They forgo natural children to become spiritual mothers to many.
Miller further says that the Church’s contemporary view of women is that “they are equal, but inferior.”
Let’s examine how the Church views, esteems, and even exalts women, particularly through the example of the woman par excellence — Mary.
Marian Femininity vs. Radical Feminism
For all of the rhetoric about the Church being against women, in reality, the Church is the only institution that truly advances the dogma that there is no “glass ceiling” for women.
In 1854, Blessed Pope Pius IX defined the Immaculate Conception, the doctrine that Mary alone among all men and women was conceived without original sin. Nearly 100 years later, Pope Pius XII defined the doctrine of the Assumption, that Mary was assumed, body and soul, into Heaven.
The Church is the only institution that recognizes, teaches, and advances these truths about Mary’s place among humanity. These doctrines emphasize what God did for Mary. One safeguards her from the corruption of original sin; the other preserves her from the corruption of death.
Is there any human being whom the Church esteems more than Mary? She, as a woman, is the pinnacle of humanity. She is “blessed among women.” She is “full of grace.” She is the prototypical Christian, a model for us all.
What is it that Mary models through her actions?
She models perfect humility, perfect obedience, receptivity, and a profound “Yes” to the will of God.
What of Marian femininity is found in nuns who do not abide the Church’s teachings, but advance other doctrines?
Where radical feminism reigns, Mary is degraded and dethroned.
Some female religious orders proudly proclaim that they’ve been founded in “rebellion.” What in Mary’s actions speaks rebellion?
Hearing female demands to be ordained, one is reminded of the story of Korah’s rebellion in the Book of Numbers. Korah and his men grumble against Moses because only select Levites are chosen from the 12 tribes to be priests. Korah and his men could not serve in the Tabernacle as priests. In response to their rebellion, God opens the earth to swallow them and all of their possessions.
Would Mary, like Dominican Sister Laurie Brink, say that she was “moving beyond the Church, even beyond Jesus?”
Would Mary, like billionaire foundation co-chair Melinda Gates, suggest as so many religious sisters apparently did to her, that she should question “received teaching?”
Unlike Zechariah, when Gabriel tells Mary that she will bear a Son, she answers with belief.
Mary is the daughter of the Father, the Mother of the Son, and the spouse of the Holy Spirit. How is it that Mary has the three highest positions achievable in the faith? Mary did so through her complete submission to God and what He asked of her. It is for this reason that she is both hated and opposed by Satan and radical feminists.
“Let it be done unto me according to your word,” she responds, not “Let it be done unto me according to my word.”
A Trust Betrayed
As the doctrinal assessment noted, the Church is grateful and thankful for the myriad contributions of thousands of religious sisters. Many have profoundly given of themselves sacrificially, laying down their lives for their students, the sick and those in need. Many people have been touched by many faithful sisters.
Still, others have gone astray in their teaching, their service, and their way of life.
Pope Paul VI said following the Second Vatican Council, “from some fissure the smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God.”
That smoke has been manifested in a variety of ways, including: bishops and priests who not only publicly dissented from the Church’s teachings, but also abandoned their vows and abused others; formerly Catholic powerhouse institutions of learning, higher education, hospitals, and charitable organizations caving into secularism; lay men and women who neither know the faith, nor teach it and pass it along to their children; and men’s and women’s religious orders that have lost their charism and ceased to be life-giving.
Witnessing the damage done to the Church and religious orders over the past 40 years, one cannot help but wonder if radical feminism wasn’t part of that “smoke.”
The CDF’s call for reform is the kind of correction that is most needed at this time.
Too many good religious women have been betrayed.
I recall a now-deceased older nun — a friend of our family — who belonged to an order that had discarded the habit. She, however, continued to wear it. I cannot forget the time she lovingly shared with us how she felt exiled, bullied even, by others in her community for her decision to live out her vows of poverty, chastity, and yes … obedience.
Or another older sister who was dismayed that her order’s religious shop was selling “holy” cards depicting secular “saints,” “sacred snakes,” sorcery, and New Age imagery.
A Benedictine order in Wisconsin reconstituted itself as an ecumenical community outside of the Church, while retaining the property and institution they had acquired over the years as members of the Church.
There has been a generational hijacking. How many dying religious orders continue to hang on to the property and money obtained through previous social capital while betraying the charism of their founders?
While fomenting dissent, many continue to hang on to the property and institutions paid for by previous generations, and they are provided prominent platforms from which to speak.
Many female orders have lost their charism. They are neither motherly, nor fruitful. They do not attract novices. They are not attracting young women because they do not offer something significantly different from what the secular world offers.
Clearly, corrective discipline, performed in love, is in order. That is the purpose of the doctrinal assessment and the call for reform.
Pope Benedict XVI, in Light of the World recalls that after the mid-1960s ecclesiastical penal law was no longer applied.
“The prevailing mentality was that the Church must not be a Church of laws but, rather, a Church of love; she must not punish. Thus the awareness that punishment can be an act of love ceased to exist,” said the Pope in his 2010 interview.
“Today we have to learn all over again that love for the sinner and love for the person who has been harmed are correctly balanced if I punish the sinner in the form that is possible and appropriate. In this respect there was in the past a change of mentality, in which the law and the need for punishment were obscured. Ultimately this also narrowed the concept of love, which in fact is not just being nice or courteous, but is found in the truth. And another component of truth is that I must punish the one who has sinned against real love.”
The world is in search of the Truth. Christ said, “I am the way, the Truth, and the Life. No one can come to Father except through me.” Instead of being a bride of Christ, those individuals that divorce themselves from Christ, “moving beyond Jesus” himself, cannot possibly lead His people to the Truth.
The Catholic Church’s Treatment of Nuns Is Polarizing and Alienating
I’m not a Catholic theologian or expert or activist of any kind. I’m just a mom who is getting increasingly uncomfortable with the Catholic Church in which my daughters are growing up. To me, the Vatican has become polarizing, extremist, and alienating. It seems like the true believers vs. the infidels. Now it’s the bishops vs. the nuns.
The Vatican’s enforcement office, known as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, recently said this about the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR), a mainstream organization that represents approximately 80 percent of the 57,000 nuns in the United States: “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 LCWR was found to have “certain radical feminist themes incompatible with the Catholic faith.” This was after a multi-year investigation of the nuns by a panel of American bishops.
We have two nuns in our family, and “radical feminists” are not the words I’d use to describe them. Selfless, kind, wise, courageous, funny, and hardworking are more like it. In fact, I’d say both women are, like the bishops, “authentic teachers of faith.” Both sisters have been in the trenches for years, helping the dying poor in church-run nursing homes. “Radical feminists”? More like “living saints.”
[Susan Milligan: The Vatican Should Exalt Catholic Nuns, Not Upbraid Them]
The LCWR’s leaders said they were “stunned” at the rebuke and asked for prayers as they respond, because as the nuns put it in their statement, “This is a moment of great import for religious life and the wider church.” They’re right: We have come to a moment, not just for the nuns but for the rest of us as well.
The central question is whether the church can regain its moral authority in the aftermath of the sexual abuse scandals. It’s not a question of whether women can fix the church. We know the answer to that. And it’s not a question of whether the bishops will let them. We now know that answer, too. It’s a question of whether women will choose to stick around and try.
Most of us believe that the most pro-life, truly Christian thing one can do is serve others. We admire American saints like Baltimore’s Elizabeth Ann Seton, founder of the nation’s first Catholic schools, and Frances Xavier Cabrini of Chicago, the patron saint of immigrants who started hospitals for the poor. We understand how important women have been to the history of the Catholic Church in America. The question is, will the role of women continue to grow and expand? Not if the bishops get their way. But I’ve got my money on the women.
While the number of women joining religious orders is down, these days there are still more nuns than priests in the United States. In today’s Catholic Church, women, whether as nuns or as lay people, serve as chancellors, vicars, tribunal judges, heads of Catholic Charities agencies, directors of hospitals and schools, theologians, liturgists, and finance directors. And that doesn’t take into account the sheer volume of Catholic women who volunteer on the front lines in underserved neighborhoods.
The number of men joining the priesthood has been declining for years, but it’s gotten so bad that of the some 17,000 parishes in all 50 states, more than 3,000 of them are without a resident pastor. The fact that women are barred from administering the sacraments and saying Mass, in this day and age, is becoming increasingly indefensible.
Yet, two years ago, the Vatican put out a directive that listed what the church considers to be the most serious crimes one can commit: heresy, schism, pedophilia, and … ordaining women. After the uproar by women’s groups, a Vatican official, Charles Sciciuna, tried to walk that back, saying, “This is not putting everything into one basket.” He was right. The men and women are treated very differently: Ordained women are quickly excommunicated, and priests who are abusing children are rarely excommunicated, the Christian Science Monitor reported.
Stunning news for postmodern Catholic nuns – Mat
In the beginning, there was the Conference of Major Religious Superiors of Women’s Institutes, which was established with the Vatican’s blessing in 1959 during an era of rapid growth for Catholic religious orders.
Then along came two cultural earthquakes: the Second Vatican Council and the Sexual Revolution. In 1971, the women’s conference changed its name — this time without the Vatican’s blessing — to become the Leadership Conference of Women Religious. Two leaders in this transformation later wrote that the goal was to become a “corporate force for systematic change in Church and society.”
The rest is a long story, ultimately leading to a blunt April 18 missive from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. This long-expected Vatican broadside noted “serious doctrinal problems” in LCWR proclamations, characterized by a “diminution of the fundamental Christological center” and the prevalence of “radical feminist themes incompatible with the Catholic faith.”
Women’s conference leaders offered a terse response, saying they were “stunned by the conclusions of the doctrinal assessment” from Rome.
“Stunned” was the key word for legions of headline writers, whose work resembled this Washington Post offering: “American nuns stunned by Vatican accusation of ‘radical feminism,’ crackdown.” The Chicago Sun-Times went even further, proclaiming: “Vatican waging a war on nuns.”
Truth is, tensions have been building for decades between the LCWR leadership and Vatican leaders. Thus, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith missive stressed that its call for reform was built on a lengthy study of materials created by “a particular conference of major superiors and therefore does not intend to offer judgment on the faith and life of Women Religious in the member congregations.”
This particular investigation began in 2008 and Catholic leaders first discussed some of its findings two years later. The final “doctrinal assessment” document was completed in January of 2011. Some of the specific events criticized in the Vatican document took place during the 1970s and ’80s.
It “certainly didn’t help matters” that there has been so much publicity about liberal nuns supporting White House health-care policies and new Health and Human Services regulations that require most religious institutions to include free coverage of all FDA-approved contraceptives in their health-insurance plans, noted John L. Allen Jr. of the National Catholic Reporter.
Nevertheless, “it doesn’t withstand scrutiny for anyone to say that this conflict is about the bishops and Rome being upset about the sisters, Obama and birth control,” said Allen in a telephone interview from Rome. Also, “no one is upset about all the sisters have done to abolish the death penalty, stand up for immigrants, care for the sick and help the poor. Rome praised them for that. …
“Frankly, this report could have been written 20 years ago. The real issues in this case are that old.”
For example, the Vatican noted that in 1977 the LCWR leadership openly rejected Catholic teachings on the “reservation of priestly ordination to men.” The women’s conference later published a training book suggesting that it’s legitimate for sisters to debate whether celebrations of the Mass should be central to events in their communities, since this would require the presence of a male priest. In the ’80s, leaders in female orders backed the New Ways Ministry’s work to oppose Catholic teachings on homosexuality.
A pivotal moment came in 2007, when Dominican Sister Laurie Brink delivered the keynote address at a national LCWR assembly stating that it was time for some religious orders to enter an era of “sojourning” that would require “moving beyond the church, even beyond Jesus.”
With the emergence of the women’s movement and related forms of spirituality, many sisters would see “the divine within nature” and embrace an “emerging new cosmology” that would feed their souls, said Brink. For these sisters, the “Jesus narrative is not the only or the most important narrative. … Jesus is not the only son of God.”
A year later, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith opened its investigation of the LCWR.
The Brink address, noted the resulting doctrinal assessment, “is a challenge not only to core Catholic beliefs; such a rejection of faith is also a serious source of scandal and is incompatible with religious life. … Some might see in Sr. Brink’s analysis a phenomenological snapshot of religious life today. But pastors of the Church should also see in it a cry for help.”
Terry Mattingly is the director of the Washington Journalism Center at the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities and leads the GetReligion.org project to study religion and the news.
Opinions expressed on the Faith page are the author’s and are not necessarily those of the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman, its staff or its parent company, Wick Communications Co. To submit a column or other news for the Faith page, send email to news@frontiersman.com, or call 352-2268.
Stunning news for postmodern nuns
Oklahoman
Leave a comment
In the beginning, there was the Conference of Major Religious Superiors of Women’s Institutes, which was established with the Vatican’s blessing in 1959 during an era of rapid growth for Catholic religious orders.
Then along came two cultural earthquakes: the Second Vatican Council and the Sexual Revolution. In 1971, the women’s conference changed its name — this time without the Vatican’s blessing — to become the Leadership Conference of Women Religious. Two leaders in this transformation later wrote that the goal was to become a “corporate force for systematic change in Church and society.” The rest is a long story, ultimately leading to a blunt April 18 missive from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. This long-expected Vatican broadside noted “serious doctrinal problems” in LCWR proclamations, characterized by a “diminution of the fundamental Christological center” and the prevalence of “radical feminist themes incompatible with the Catholic faith.” Women’s conference leaders offered a terse response, saying they were “stunned by the conclusions of the doctrinal assessment” from Rome. “Stunned” was the key word for legions of headline writers, whose work resembled this Washington Post offering: “American nuns stunned by Vatican accusation of ‘radical feminism,’ crackdown.” The Chicago Sun-Times went even further, proclaiming: “Vatican waging a war on nuns.” Truth is, tensions have been building for decades between the LCWR leadership and Vatican leaders. Thus, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith missive stressed that its call for reform was built on a lengthy study of materials created by “a particular conference of major superiors and therefore does not intend to offer judgment on the faith and life of Women Religious in the member congregations.” This particular investigation began in 2008 and Catholic leaders first discussed some of its findings two years later.
12Next 
News Photo Galleriesview all
George Lindsey, known as TV’s Goober Pyle, dies…
George Lindsey, who portrayed Goober Pyle on television shows, died…
7 photos
Kentucky Derby
See derby day photos from Louisville, Ky. on Saturday, May 5, 2012.
99 photos
Freedom Tower: May 1, 2012
View the photos.
8 photos
Oklahoma City Memorial Marathon
See the photos from the marathon in Oklahoma City on Sunday, April…
38 photos
Prev
1
2
3
4
5
Next
Mixed message
View Comments Email Article
Printable Version
Published: May 1, 2012
Honorary Committee for archbishop filled with Church enemies
As Archbishop George Niederauer prepares to lay down the burdens of his episcopacy, he is receiving many thanks. On Saturday, April 28, Catholic Charities Catholic Youth Organization of San Francisco honored the archbishop at its 2012 Loaves and Fishes dinner.
As soon Archbishop Niederauer arrived in San Francisco in 2006, he had to deal with the same-sex adoptions fiasco, caused by the youth organization’s placing of children in same-sex households. That mess didn’t get cleaned up until 2009 – but it was not the only headache the group caused the archbishop during his years in San Francisco.
At its 2008 Loaves and Fishes dinner, the Catholic Charities youth group honored George Marcus. In 2004, Marcus had given $50,000 to Proposition 71, which authorized public funding for embryonic stem-cell research. In 2005-06 Marcus gave $125,000 to oppose initiatives that provided for parental notification when minors seek an abortion. California’s bishops opposed Proposition 71 and favored the parental notification initiatives.
In 2007 and 2008, a transvestite and homosexual activist named “Donna Sachet” made news by appearing as the entertainer at Catholic Charities events.
The honorary committee for this year’s Loaves and Fishes dinner included Brian Cahill, immediate past executive director of Catholic Charities Catholic Youth Organization. On April 27, just one day before the dinner honoring the archbishop, the San Francisco Chronicle published a column by Cahill titled, “U.S. Nuns Deserved Support.” In the column. Cahill condemned the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith for their recent crackdown on the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, an organization whose departures from Catholicism have been thoroughly documented. Cahill wrote that “the word bully comes to mind” and said of the bishops, “It is becoming increasingly obvious to many Catholics that these ‘men only’ club members are not in control, are not relevant and have lost their moral authority.”
The April 27 column was not the first time Cahill’s dissident opinions have appeared in the Chronicle. In a Feb. 21 Chronicle column, Cahill attacked the bishops for their opposition to the recent HHS mandate.
Other members of the honorary committee included Sen. Diane Feinstein, who has never in her senatorial career received anything less than a 100 percent approval rating from Planned Parenthood. Only four times, since 1995 has Feinstein received a less than 100 percent rating from the Human Rights Campaign, the most powerful homosexual lobbying organization in the country. Of those four times her lowest approval rating was 75 percent. Feinstein also voted to table the Blunt Amendment, which would have provided conscience protections under Obamacare. In 2010, Feinstein called the ruling of Judge Vaughn Walker, which declared Proposition 8 unconstitutional and invalidated the votes of a majority of Californians, “very good news.” Archbishop Niederauer was one of the major players in the passage of Prop 8 – even earning a “pink brick” negative award from the organizers of San Francisco’s gay pride parade in 2009.
On the same dinner committee was San Francisco Supervisor Malia Cohen, who introduced an ordinance restricting freedom of speech at San Francisco’s crisis pregnancy centers, First Resort and the Alpha Pregnancy Center. That ordinance, passed 10-1, is currently being challenged in court. The webpage of the Office of Public Policy and the Office of Social Concerns of the Archdiocese of San Francisco currently carries the banner, “Support our Crisis Pregnancy Centers against San Francisco’s Attempted Free Speech Attacks.”
San Francisco supervisors David Campos, David Chiu, Carmen Chu, Sean Elsbernd, Mark Farrell and Jane Kim were on the honorary committee. Elsbernd cast the only vote against Cohen’s ordinance. All of them have expressed their support for “abortion rights” and same-sex “marriage” – two moral issues Pope Benedict has declared “non-negotiable” for Catholics.
The rest of the members of the honorary committee included San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee, who kicked off the city’s 2011 Transgender March, the city’s police and fire chiefs, and Fr. Stephen Privett, SJ, president of the heterodox University of San Francisco.
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 12:21 AM By Dan
I love the Imitation of Christ by Thomas a Kempis. Therein he counsels against receiving honor from those who would flatter, or seek favor by flattery, and in general calls for devout souls to do just the opposite, to fly from fame and notoriety. He should have declined the invitation, and used the occasion to give reasons why.
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 12:47 AM By Kenneth M. Fisher
From what I have seen and witnessed from Niederauer’s reign, If I were his spiritual advisor, I would tell him to find an obscure, strict, orthodox Monastery and go there for the rest of his life to ask God to forgive him for his sins of both commission and omission!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 5:44 AM By Canisius
Coming from this “diocese” is anyone really that surprised
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 6:30 AM By St. Christopher
Yes — the good bishop is just like Jesus, dining with Romans, Sanhedrin and Pharisees. What a complete and utter failure as bishop, and in a place and at a time when the Church needed someone to simply stand up in the public square and quietly say, “enough”. Instead, Bishop Niederauer was busy giving communion to the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence and the like, and being completely tone deaf to the moral scandal in his own Church (and true needs of the community in his charge). Until the Church stops such men as this from being bishop and appoints men who are faithful to the Magisterium, including the Pope, this type of behavior will continue. Of course, the Bishop should decline this dinner and say why, publicly. Too tough for many bishops to do this, as they were raised to be soft and feminine, when what was needed is a shepherd, one who does not run when the wolf arrives to find a meal among the sheep.
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 6:56 AM By Marie Searles
Let’s make it clear that those radical anti-Catholic/anti-life individuals honoring the archbishop are enemies of the Catholic Church, but apparently not enemies of the archbishop.
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 7:21 AM By MacDonald
Archbishop Niederauer must be REALLY looking forward to retirement. His many years as Bishop of Salt Lake City were a breeze compared to this place, where everything is a hot button issue. His heart problems flared up again recently, forcing him to miss the “ad limina” visit with the Holy Father, the last one he would have enjoyed before retirement. Every nut case is attacking him for what he said, didn’t say, did, failed to do, or simply for the Church he represents as Vicar of Christ in his Archdiocese (as the Catechism calls it). Some vandals have even spray-painted swastikas on Most Holy Redeemer Church in the Castro, attacking his (and the Holy Father’s) German heritage to compare them to Nazis, saying: “Niederauer and Ratzinger – where is the love?” I hope Archbishop Niederauer gets to enjoy a peaceful retirement soon, far from the nuttiness that this archdiocese pushes upon the faithful: including our bishops and priests, nuns, sisters, brothers, and laity!!!
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 7:46 AM By Elizabeth
As I pray for the AB everyday……
This is the reason we need an ORTHODOX new
Archbishop and one that doesn’t have ANY TIES to
San Francisco and will CLEAN HOUSE.
Please EVERYONE pray for the archdiocese of San Francisco!!!
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 8:30 AM By Fr. Richard Perozich
Cardinal Oulette will have to vet some younger priests with strong character and the ability to “set their faces like flint” in order to recapture the faith for San Francisco.
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 8:31 AM By Dan
Talk about mixed messages, the Jesuits are awarding honorary degrees at USF to Lynn Woolsey and Goodwin Liu. Honoring these two pro-abort and pro-hmoxexual marriage stalwarts, the Jesuits are once again thumbing their nose at the faith. What kind of protest shall we hear from Archbishop Niederauer, now that he has been honored by the same crowd at Loaves and Fishes?
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 9:07 AM By Peggy
Elizabeth, do you want to bet that the next AB will be McElroy?
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 9:17 AM By ldc
I agree with all, I know as a cradle practicing Roman Catholic that we cannot ‘fight’ or ‘judge’…but the Bishop should have denied the invitation like one of the previous commentator suggested and take the opportunity to give the REASON why not…PREACH THE FAITH that he and we well know, as for the other ‘nut-case’, no I don’t think they are nuts the devil knows what he is doing, like Obama, DIVISION…if that was not the case they can leave the Catholic Church and go to the many others that are there…BUT OH NO THEY HAVE TO COME TO THE TRUTH, TO THE STRONGEST, I say pray for this is not over nor the end, this is the beginning of a rough year, we can try and make a difference come November 2012. God Bless our Country, and may our Blessed Mother be at our side always, PRAY…!!! Thursday is National Day of Prayer, pray from whenever you are let us just unite in prayer wherever you are driving, walking, cooking….etc. lift our hearts to Him.
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 9:34 AM By max
Kenneth M. Fisher : your comments abouty the need to be “orhtodfox” are a big laugh, given sthe fact you attned a parish that is not in communion with the Roman CAtholic Church, and your pastoar is not even considered a real priest by the Roman CAtholic Church. I’vae read all about the INDEPENDENT aprarish you attend, and you are the one who should be asking GOD to forgive you for you sins in choosing a parihxsh that is not trulya Catholic!
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 9:47 AM By Ron
Google “the refusal Niederauer” and watch the YouTube made by the SJMS.
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 10:04 AM By Maryanne Leonard
MacDonald, thank you for a great post. I have met Archbishop Niederauer and attended his lectures at seminary and have to say he is a good man and a scholar. I have never met the man who is up to the task of changing the Archdiocese of San Francisco with its Most Holy Redeemer Church and others. I have often wondered if being appointed to this archdiocese, where the most dastardly crime possible was perpetrated against me in the 1960′s, yes, on church property, is a mark of remarkable confidence in a single human being or a cursed yoke that could kill a good man before he had a chance to retire. I admire Archbishop Niederauer as a good and kind human being, but I wouldn’t wish that archdiocese on anyone. So many of its glorious landmark institutions, including churches and hospitals, have been defiled beyond redemption by mere mortals. It will take the Holy Spirit of God to save this tragically corrupted, completely ungovernable archdiocese, a shameful scourge on the American Catholic Church. Its shame cannot be explained away by merely looking to its historical roots in a wildly sinful San Francisco of the 1800′s or its huge population of scandelous sinners actively working to destroy the leadership and spiritual architecture of the archdiocese. This archdiocese has been infected by evil so broadly that we cry to the Lord to save it from itself, as we have failed so honorably and so miserably.
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 10:41 AM By Doc Mugwump
We cannot judge the heart of this bishop; but also we can heed the words of Christ, “By their fruits you shall know them.” Am relieved, … yes relieved he is retiring. Pope Benedict XVI will be in charge of appointing a new Archbishop. Pray that this new man is a Good Shepherd and not a wolf in sheeo’s clothing.
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 10:48 AM By Abeca Christian
Fancy this, we expect His excellency to clean house when the majority of the Catholics there are heretical, who knows how many threats he received that caused him to lead with fear or he just doesn’t really understand the real issues facing that area and rather would ignore it. If only the people would unite in a peaceful protest every time they had a scandal coming from that area. We may see better improvements. I think everyone is afraid or there isn’t enough with the convictions to stand up for what they believe in. There are still faithful living there but probably just a few and that few is what is saving San Fransisco from the wrath it deserves!
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 11:01 AM By pjdjmj
When the Bishop was appointed I looked up his record, It was not good. As with many Bishops, I want to know who was recommending them. We need to get rid of the person(s) foisting them off on us. The SF Diocese should have put a stop to the CYO’s pro-Sodomite stance before it started. Why was Cahill allowed to run anything Cathlic especially one concerning on children? Our Church has had big problems for many years with many in power pushing their own religion. Years ago there was one Bishop in Lincoln, Nebraska who was actually a holy Priest – a real Catholic. Of course, he was ignored and ridiculed by the rest. This all brings to mind the old saying, “The Irish are Catholic in spite of the Church”. It applies to America also. Read Fr. Malachy Martin’s books. VatII obviously was a big error.
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 12:20 PM By Pauline
If anyone has recommendations on the type of Bishop needed in their Diocese, they should write to the US Papal Nuncio and state the reasons why. Thank goodness that the Pope accepted the mandatory age retirement of both Niederauer and Mahoney, rather than asking them to continue. No one need pay attention to them any longer. Many Souls may have been lost under their leadership which caused Scandal, and lack of upholding the teachings of the Church which are stated in the CCC.
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 1:04 PM By Samuel
What a messs! I would not agree to become a Bishop for a trillion dollars — not that anyone has offered me the chance. I of5ten read ABUSE TRACKER and am constantly amazined by how many people (priests, lay people, minisst3ers, nuns, ravbbis, imams, etc.) are abusing people, stealing money and doing God knoww s what else. As a Bishop you are supposed to keep a clean house,a but it would send me to an early grave even trying this job for ONE DAY. Every loony in the church does their own thing and thinks they are serving God beter by being inclusive, or whatever.
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 2:45 PM By whhaiber
Max: Leave Kenneth M. Fisher alone and get spell check. My guess that Kenneth M. Fisher will stand before God on Judgement Day in better shape that Bishop Niederauer!
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 4:16 PM By Dr. K
We must pray for a Holy and Courageous Archbishop to replace Niederauer, someone on the order of Bishop Vasa of Santa Rosa.
Unfortunately, many Bishops have been corrupted by money and have compromised principles to obtain easy Govt. money. In fact this Banquet of “Fishes Loaves” is a fundraiser itself. Need I say more?
PRAY, PRAY, PRAY!
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 4:19 PM By Jimmy Mac
How could you have missed Scoobey Doo? I was sitting behind him in the 3rd row, center. He was wearing the satanic wig with a small tasteful trident in his claws.
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 5:27 PM By Dana
Samuel, with God all things are possible! Bishops are not supposed to make big decisions on their own, but with much prayer and the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Our beloved Pope Benedict is such an example of one who lives his daily life in prayer. Don’t you think that’s what the saints teach us? But do we listen? (smile) If God calls you to something great, He won’t leave you without the tools to do it.
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 5:43 PM By Dana
Pauline, not one of us, no not ONE when we face final judgment will be able to blame a bishop, a priest or anyone else for our sins. We have only ourselves to thank for them and only we will face the consequences. It is good when we have a strong shepherd, I agree, but when we don’t we still have to use self-discipline, prayer, love and forgiveness in our daily lives. Frankly, I’m shocked at the mean-spirited, judgmental, unloving attitudes towards the priests and bishops by the many of the people who contribute to these posts. We’re even called to love our enemies, let alone those who try to guide and love us. I pray for my bishop everyday and I feel much closer to him and can better understand what sadness and frustration he must feel sometimes. The world is getting so hateful to the Church and it’s getting worse everyday. We must really strive to love one another as Jesus calls us to do. And keep praying for God’s will to be done in San Francisco.
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 5:51 PM By JLS
Pope Benedict XVI gives the one word qualification for bishop: Become holy. Why did he recently request they become holy? Wouldn’t that be a given? Why is such a condition of being holy ever in need of a reminder by a pope to all bishops? The hierarchy needs to begin drawing candidates from some totally nuther pool … because the one they’ve got them from for decades is a poisoned well.
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 5:55 PM By JLS
Vatican II may have been the best God was able to do with the particular bishops running it. At least its documents do not clearly state something opposed to doctrine … maybe the vagueness of the V2 documents reflects God’s intervention in what otherwise could have been way worse. Can you see what I’m driving at? Maybe God made the best that could have been wrought of an abysmal situation.
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 5:59 PM By JLS
Maryanne, another that is “good and kind” is a lump on a log, not to mention a whited wall. Have you ever noticed how pleasant and peaceful is a whited wall, especially one filled with dead men’s bones? Dead souls do not rock boats, nor do they right the ones that are rocking either.
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 6:23 PM By JLS
Good report, Jimmy Mac, but tell us what you were on at the time. Were they serving witches brew?
Posted Tuesday, May 01, 2012 9:22 PM By Cody in Tucson
Kenneth – Since Patrick Zieman has passed on there is probably an empty room at the monastery in St David Az. I’m not sure the place is “strict, orthodox” as you require, but we all know that it is in a diocese that is lead by a bishop that proclaimed to you that he is “orthodox”. Don’t we all need a good laugh once in a while on this website?
Posted Wednesday, May 02, 2012 1:12 AM By pjdjmj
JLS – VATII was/is an unholy mess. I’m not going to blame God. Scared. You can if you want.
Dana – Perhaps your diocese is an exception and your Bishop is actually holy. Years ago we had a holy, intelligent and kind Cardinal. Loud, unholy, worldly Bishops, Priests and Nuns drove him to his death. He used to quietly take days off in our Parish – at that time we had a Parish Priest who had the same qualities. God and Mary bless their souls.
Posted Wednesday, May 02, 2012 6:03 AM By Sandra
As I pray for the AB everyday…… This is the reason we need an ORTHODOX new Archbishop and one that doesn’t have ANY TIES to San Francisco and will CLEAN HOUSE. Please EVERYONE pray for the archdiocese of San Francisco!!! (Amen Elizabeth)
Posted Wednesday, May 02, 2012 6:12 AM By St. Christopher
“JLS”: That is a brilliant thought — Perhaps Vatican II and its implementation were limited in their adverse effect by the Holy Ghost. After all, Christ had to suffer humiliation and death, something not understandable to human beings, so perhaps out of the ashes, so to speak, something more glorious and certain will be created.
Posted Wednesday, May 02, 2012 6:47 AM By Dana
That was a good post Maryanne, and I agree. He was not only a force for good but also was a tremendous influence on getting Prop 8 passed…no small thing! I read his bio today, and he has a Phd in English literature besides all his work in Theology etc. I think he was grossly under appreciated and you’re all going to miss him when he’s gone.
Posted Wednesday, May 02, 2012 7:33 AM By max
@ whhaiber…sorry i’m not the best typiest, but what i wrote about Kenneth M. Fisher attending a btreak-away parish is accurate and NOT a good sign of orrthodoxy. how can a person claim to uphold the ROMAN CATHOLIC FAITH and chooose a parish that ia not Roamnan Cathlic??? i’ve read up about the adifferent groups that call themselvbses “INDEPENDENT CATHOLICS” AND they all have obne thing in common: they ignore the Magistierum, they set themselves up as knowing better than the pope (whether they are from the right or the left), and they mislead the faithful by CLAIIMING to be Catholic in terms of wedddigs, Sunday Masses, and aso on and so forth. I think the Holy Father in Rome shoul dtry to get a “patent” for the word CATHO0LIC s every Tom, dick and Harry can’t co-opt this word!!!
Posted Wednesday, May 02, 2012 11:08 AM By Pauline
Dana, you are right that we can only blame ourselves if we do not read a CATHOLIC BIBLE and the “CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, Second Edition” from the Magisterium. CCC: ” 1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin. In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.” Also according to the CCC – the Bishops main job is to teach. They must impart that reading of Bible and CCC is required reading or the ignorance in the USA is our own fault. Also, we and the Bishops can be held accountable for the sins of others under certain circumstances – please see CCC ” 1868 Sin is a personal act. Moreover, we have a responsibility for the sins committed by others when we cooperate in them:
- by participating directly and voluntarily in them; – by ordering, advising, praising, or approving them; – by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so; – by protecting evil-doers.” Bishops have a bigger obligation that the rest of us.
Posted Wednesday, May 02, 2012 3:31 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
A Bishop’s Robes are RED for one reason, they are supposed to be willing to shed their blood for Christ and His Church! Archbishop Khai told me that many times.
By the way, he knew where I was attending Mass even when he presented me to Pope John Paul II as his Personal American Secretary!
To answer another question, it was most probably Cdl. Mahony who was instrumental in putting Neiderauer into Sad Francisco.
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
Posted Wednesday, May 02, 2012 3:38 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
9:22 PM By Cody in Tucson,
I could recommend a wonderful Maronite Retreat House in South Dakota! You can even see Mount Rushmore from there!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
Posted Wednesday, May 02, 2012 3:43 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
1:12 AM By pjdjmj,
It sounds like you are writing about our beloved late Cardinal Mcyntire!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
Posted Wednesday, May 02, 2012 3:49 PM By whhaiber
Max: I am sort of a student of the Catholic Traditionalist Movement. I am aware of the whole spectrum of adherants of the Tridentine Latin Mass from parishes in full communion with Rome (e.g. St. Anne’s in San Diego of the Fraternity of St. Peter where I attend Mass) through to Sedevacantism and to Conclavism (groups that have elected there own (Anti)Popes and where I would draw the line and not attend). I personally believe our present Holy Father is a valid Pope (as was his predecessors John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I and II), however the litugical abuses of the Mass, “gay” parishes, woman “priests”, and the other horrors that Vatican II has wrought, I don’t blame Mr. Fisher for attending an “independent” Catholic parish. I would attend such a parish if my Diocese did not permit the TLM. I don’t know which parish it is but my belief it is more faithful to the Magisterium and definitely more orthodox than Most Holy Redeemer Church if SF!!! You go Ken!!
Posted Wednesday, May 02, 2012 3:56 PM By max
KENNETH M. FISHER, who is this Archbishop Khai you are always talking aboutt? it semes like his name appears every other day when you are posting.kk I’VE met the Holy Father in person, too, but at least dj I attend a REAL Cahtolic parish, not some breakway place that calls itself “independent” Makes youi wonder…INDEPENDENT FROM WHOM? the Holy See? the Pope? the Magistierum?
Posted Wednesday, May 02, 2012 4:04 PM By JLS
So, max, you take it upon yourself to declare the relationship of Kenneth’s parish to God? I thought that was a papal function.
Posted Wednesday, May 02, 2012 4:06 PM By JLS
pjdjmj, like some other bloggers, you do not seem to have the skill to read a post for what it says, and instead you substitute your best or wildest guess. Try reading both of my posts on this point, and slowly, use a dictionary if necessary, use a grammar if necessary, ask someone else to explain to you what it says. But how do you justify twisting it?
Posted Wednesday, May 02, 2012 5:52 PM By pjd
JLS – you learn some manners. I was joking but now I’m not…pray that you can someday become a nice person.
Posted Wednesday, May 02, 2012 6:41 PM By max
no, JLS, I checked with the dioceswe by phone and they confirmed that Kenneth’s parish is not Cahtolic, and neither is his pastor. Dioesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out what this meansa — some guy setting up his own rleigion, like that fellow in the midwest who claims to be the real pope! I just read about him last week and he’s the same kind of INDEPENDENT caqtholic that Kenneth’s parish is.
Posted Wednesday, May 02, 2012 8:23 PM By Elizabeth
I was told awhile ago from someone in the Church,
that they never appoint a man to the diocese in which
that man grew up…..and Bishop McElroy grew up
in the Archdiocese of San Francisco…..
Posted Wednesday, May 02, 2012 9:52 PM By JLS
max, you provide your interpretation of what some anonymous person at the diocese told you. Can you even spell the word, “credibility”, correctly, let alone comprehend what it means? Are you aware that there is “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church”? Anyone baptised and not excommunicated is a Catholic … surprise, surprise, max … because there is only one Church.
Posted Wednesday, May 02, 2012 9:59 PM By JLS
pjd, are manners more important to you than truth?
Posted Wednesday, May 02, 2012 10:02 PM By JLS
max, your investigative work is astonishing. And I’m glad to see that you’re now the spokesman for the diocese on the topic of independent churches.
Posted Wednesday, May 02, 2012 10:10 PM By JLS
max, here is a sample of a moment of research on Archbishop Khai: “Along with the other Catholics who refused to renounce their faith, Archbishop Khai was subject to beatings and torture. At one point he was led outside and told that he was to be executed. Still he refused to renounce his faith in Jesus Christ.” This is from a speech he gave after celebrating Mass at the Cathedral in Denver, and meeting with Archbishop Chaput. If you have no knowledge of Abp Chaput or the significance of the Denver Archdiocese, then hit google and find out. Another research project that you’d benefit from is to start on page one of the history of the Catholic Church.
Posted Thursday, May 03, 2012 7:19 AM By MacDonald
Jesus was attacked for sitting down and eating with sinners, but I’ve always thought he chose to do so in the hopes of CHANGING their hearts by his goodness. When Archbishop Niederauer is invited to a dinner in his honor, I doubt he checks the guest list, making sure everyone is in a state of grace — not that he (or we) have that power anyway. When Blessed Pope John Paul II visited Mission Dolores Basilica in 1987 to meet with people with AIDS, he did not have the Swiss Guards interrogate them about their sexual practices before he deigned to shake hands with them. On the contrary, he preached that day, “God loves you unconditionally.” This was not the Holy Father speaking off the cuff after too much Polish vodka, but a prepared text he had chosen SPECIFICALLY for that group and that occasion. Certainly, he wanted people to ‘turn away from sin and be faithful to the Gospel,’ as we hear on Ash Wednesday, but he never vilified those people by calling them sodomites, perverts, etc. It was beneath him, and should be beneath us.
Posted Thursday, May 03, 2012 9:57 AM By Abeca Christian
MacDonald it is obvious that you do not know your scripture passages well. The scripture passage you just mentioned is used often(in the wrong tone) as a way to make people condone or affirm evil, which Jesus did none of those things. I got news for you, this story has nothing to do with comparing it to Jesus eating with the sinners, nothing at all, no comparison. If you knew your scriptures well, you would know this. Maybe when I re-gain some patience, I can explain it to you and as to why you are in error in what you just posted but you caught me at one of my down times.
Posted Thursday, May 03, 2012 10:46 AM By pjd
JLS – sorry/juvenile try. My remarks re your post ARE the truth.
Posted Thursday, May 03, 2012 5:57 PM By Abeca Christian
JLS you are a nice person, I appreciate your kindness and even when sometimes hearing the truth can crush a bit of our pride, I still appreciate your honesty. The truth is JLS you are passionate about the faith, it is refreshing and I also get most of your sense of humor, some here don’t! To bad, they are missing out! God bless you always JLS!
Posted Friday, May 04, 2012 12:18 AM By Kenneth M. Fisher
I knew it would be just so long before “catholics” on this site would attack me for taking the same path as did St. Athanasius the Great who was actually excommunicated by Pope Liberius, who himself was declared a heretic by his predecessor, I think that was Pope Innocent!
BTW, I attend both the Novus Ordo (but with trepidation) and Tridentine Masses.
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
Posted Friday, May 04, 2012 12:32 AM By Kenneth M. Fisher
JLS,
Archbishop Khai actually once had a shotgun placed in his mouth and the Chief of Police, who the Archbishop later converted, said he was going to count to three and then if the Archbishop did not disown his Christ, he would pull the trigger. Once while he was giving this talk to a large group, he stopped and asked me if I had any idea why the Chief of Police only counted to two. When I said I had no idea, he explained that in Thailand it was a matter of personal honor that if you counted to three and did not follow through your were dishonored. To that I replied “Your Excellency, thank God and His Mother that he stopped at two”. The Archbishop was also at one time lowered head first into a wel to be drownedl, but God dried up the well. I have visited that well with the Archbishop.
I could tell many more things the good Archbishop taught me, but it would take up too much space.
I have been truly blessed by God with the presence and friendship of many Church Giants, and I know I will have to answer for those gifts at the end of my life.
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
Posted Friday, May 04, 2012 9:29 AM By MacDonald
@ Abeca 9:57 a.m. — thank you so much for offering a lesson on Holy Scripture, but no thanks. I made it clear in my post that Jesus sat down with sinners to CHANGE THEIR HEARTS, not to condone their behavior. The same is true of us, hopefully. When we interact with fellow sinners (you and I are not immaculate), our words, actions, and attitudes will hopefully bring some light to them, rather than make them run away screaming. As Mother Teresa once said: “Let us always meet each other with smile, for the smile is the beginning of love.” My hope is that Archbishop Niederauer’s warm smile, which is a nice change from the PREVIOUS Ordinary of our Archdiocese, will indeed be “the beginning of love” even for enemies of the Church.
Posted Friday, May 04, 2012 12:40 PM By Abeca Christian
MacDonald you state that Jesus sat down with sinners to change their hearts. Well don’t you know that Jesus knew who they were? The ones who were willing, he sat and ate with them but the ones who didn’t, he never visited. Our Lord didn’t waste time on the ones who would waste His message of love and salvation. Even the ones who walked away he knew he wasn’t wasting his time. There were times the our Lord didn’t visit a town where he was not welcomed at. Today in this case, eating with sinners and not admonishing their sins, is the same as condoning. They eat fancy foods, wine and dine each other but never a mention in what needs to be done to save their souls. Mother Teresa when she was invited to eat with the wealthy sinners, she was caught many a great times telling them that abortion was a sin, she was caught teaching love and Christ, just her very presence, she brought Jesus through the way she lived her life but sometimes we have Archbishops that just attend but leave Jesus back at home. Jesus ate with the sinners, he just had to bring himself, he was the real message of love and salvation! So no, this situation is no comparison with how you view Jesus eating with the sinners! NOPE not at all! Jesus did not sin!
Posted Friday, May 04, 2012 2:26 PM By k
Mr. Fisher, did St. Athanasius start his own church when he was excommunicated?
Posted Friday, May 04, 2012 4:10 PM By JLS
k, Athanasius was the Catholic Church and his excommunicators actually excommunicated themselves, leaving him as almost the only Catholic bishop.
Posted Friday, May 04, 2012 4:13 PM By JLS
pjd, if your posts “are the truth” as you claim, then wouldn’t you think you could defend them well?
Posted Saturday, May 05, 2012 7:53 AM By MacDonald
ABECA CHRISTIAN at 12:40 p.m. — you invent the notion that Jesus “never visited” with unwilling sinners. How many times do we read in the Bible that, at such dinners, the very people Jesus broke bread with were closed to his message, criticized his actions, and were stubborn as mules? Of course Jesus did not sin, but he MIXES with sinners like you and me constantly, hoping to bring us all to greater holiness.
Posted Saturday, May 05, 2012 6:34 PM By markrite
Mein Gott, what a snake-pit of moral corruption and nauseating hypocrisy the city of San Francisco has become!! I’ve heard the term “diabolical disorientation” used quite a lot recently in regard to various milieus where the radical liberal cognoscenti have ascended to positions of great power, but very few places compare to San Fran in this regard, which is why it has earned, in the gay context especially, the appelation of “sodom by the bay”, but probably it’s earned in relation to the abortion horror as well. It must be, due to the baneful influences of Pelosi and Fienstein, not to mention Gavin Newsom. So where is Abp. Niederauer in all this? Why does he not exercise his episcopal authority and PUBLICLY CONDEMN AND OFFICIALLY TOSS FROM THE HOLY ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH all the so-called Catholics who continue to play the “cafeteria-Catholic” games, from Gov.”moonbeam” Brown to “princess” Pelosi; EXCOMMUNICATE them and do it NOW for the spiritual edification of the faithful, for the WITNESS that is so sorely needed at this critical hour of our nation’s history, and once again, GOD BLESS ALL in Jesus’ name, MARKRITE
Posted Sunday, May 06, 2012 12:57 AM By Kenneth M. Fisher
k,
No he did not and neither have the priests at Our Lady Help of Christians. In fact we probably hear more about obedience to the Magisterium from the pulpit there than you do in most other Churches in the Diocese of Orange, and yes they have a picture of Pope Benedict prominently dispalyed in the vestibule of the Church. Notto long ago our Pastor gave an excellent homily against “sedevecantism”.
BTW, the homilies are posted on the Parish Website.
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
Posted Sunday, May 06, 2012 6:19 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
BTW, Our Lady Help of Christian probably has more young men and women studying to become priests and religious than does any of Bp. Tod Brown’s approved churches!
I wish you all could of heard the wonderful sermon given today by our Fr. Stephen, OFM Conv. on the “Father” and the need for us to address him more. Actually you can read that homily soon on the OLHC Website. He also gives wonderful talks every other Saturday on Brother St. Francis.
I think he may have been a Professor somewhere before he obtained permission from his Superior to come to OLHC.
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
Posted Sunday, May 06, 2012 7:35 PM By Mark
Kenneth, I attended St. Joseph College Seminary in Los Altos with Fr. Pat Perez of your parish (Our Lady Help of Christians), and even in those days (the 80s) he was fond of going his own way. As students in the minor seminary we were not yet permitted to wear the Roman collar, but Pat had a custom-made cassock, green sash, sholder cape, and pectoral cross, in which he would stroll through the seminary grounds in the evening. At the time I thought it was rather cool, because I was impressionable. Now, I am saddened to read on your website that he leads a parish that is not in communion with the Roman Catholic Church, but rather “independent.” This word does not mean he’s had a tiff with the local bishop, but that he has joined an organization that has chosen to break with Rome. I’m sorry this has happened to my old friend Pat, for whom I had such high hopes…
Posted Sunday, May 06, 2012 8:15 PM By Abeca Christian
MacDonald you are too busy trying to prove me wrong that you miss the point plus I don’t invent any notion, I can’t help it if you miss the real point to my post.
Posted Sunday, May 06, 2012 8:36 PM By JLS
Kenneth, your accounts of Archbishop Khai are good to hear. At least there are some clerics who do not allow themselves to be blinded by the comforts and intellectual intrigues of modern times. This is likely why they encounter such difficulties, because they refuse to be led by the soothsayers of modernity, whose guile is the doom of so many bishops today.
Posted Sunday, May 06, 2012 8:45 PM By k
Mr. Fisher, this is very confusing! Who will be ordaining the men who are becoming priests?
Posted Sunday, May 06, 2012 10:47 PM By JLS
k, bishops ordain men to the priesthood.
Posted Sunday, May 06, 2012 11:58 PM By k
Mr. Fisher, from Father John Hardon’s Modern Catholic Dictionary: “In the midst of the Arian crisis, Pope Liberius was banished by the Arian Emperor Constatius II in AD 355 for refusing to condemn St. Athanasius. Two years later he is alledged to have signed an Arian formula of faith to regain his freedom. Certain documents discrediting him are forgeries. In any event, it is certain that he signed no document freely, and so papal infallibility is not involved.” He is also referred to as Pope St. Liberius in the entry under the Liberian Basilica (St. Mary Major) but is not listed as St. in the list of Popes at the back of the dictionary.
Posted Monday, May 07, 2012 6:11 AM By JLS
k, it is not a matter of papal infallibility, but of character. The one shining thing is that the whole episode of Church history shows the glory of God in that Liberius repented later. He certainly did not live up to the martyrdom of countless other Catholics who refused to confess heresy.
Posted Monday, May 07, 2012 11:09 AM By k
JLS, I have seen other information in Catholic encyclopedia which doubts that Liberius did excommunicate Athanasius. It is a popular story with the Protestants. I guess several historians have claimed that the letter found that says that he did was forged. Other historians accept that he did but only under duress. It is used by SSPX to prove that they do not have to obey the Pope. I have read that Athanasius submitted to the excommunication. I have read that he ignored it. One would have a find a truly scholorly work on it to be able to assess the truth.
© California Catholic Daily 2012. All Rights Reserved.
Recent Posts
Categories
- a catholic prayer
- belief of catholics
- bible and catholic
- bible of the catholic church
- catechism of catholic
- catechism of catholic church
- catechism of the catholic
- catechism of the catholic church
- catholic beliefs
- catholic bible study
- catholic books
- catholic christmas cards
- catholic church
- catholic church bible
- catholic church catechism
- catholic church history
- catholic church online
- catholic doctrine
- catholic faith
- catholic first communion
- catholic guide
- catholic hymns
- catholic information
- catholic mass
- catholic missal
- catholic news
- catholic prayer book
- catholic prayers
- catholic source
- catholic sources
- catholic theology
- catholic topics
- catholics and the bible
- confirmation gifts
- doctrine catholic
- holy cards
- holy spirit catholic
- liturgical calendar
- prayers for children
- prayers for the catholic church
- resources catholic
- roman catholic doctrine
- roman catholic faith
- roman catholic teaching
- roman missal
- spiritual catholic
- st charles borromeo
- st francis de sales
- st john the evangelist
- st rose of lima
- sunday homilies
- the catechism of the catholic church
- the catholic catechism
- the catholic prayer
- the catholic saints
- the roman catholic faith