Created in 1956, LCWR has a history of being at the forefront of change and renewal in the US Catholic church as well as acting as a strong advocate for social justice in society.Let's take this apart. First of all, there is no such thing as a "US Catholic church." (Note the small c for "church"). There is only the Holy Roman Catholic Church founded by Jesus Christ on the rock of Peter whose successor is Pope Benedict XVI. By using this phrase, LCWR has already declared its separateness from Rome, the same thing that happened in the 19th century with the heresy of Americanism. Americanism basically declared the situation unique in the U.S. and emphasized individualism thereby undermining Church authority. John F. Kennedy's speech in Houston in 1960 where he declared his independence from the Church was a prime example of Americanism. It's been echoed by other Catholic politicians like Ted Kennedy, Mario Cuomo, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, and John Kerry. But not only politicians promote the mindset. Priests and religious who use personal conscience to undermine Church doctrine (Cardinal Joseph Bernardin was an expert in this department.) also illustrate the infection of Americanism. A particularly insidious example is the healthcare debate. Waving the flag of independence, Sr. Carol Keehan of the Catholic Health Association, defied the USCCB (U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops) and was so instrumental in passing Obamacare the president invited her to the signing and she received one of the pens. LCWR honored her for it. So LCWR immediately places itself among those thumbing their noses at Church authority proclaiming by their actions that the U.S. "church" is different and the hierarchy have no right to exercise authority here.
But what does LCWR mean when it says since 1956 their organization has been at the "forefront of change and renewal?" Change for change's sake is typical of the modernist heresy which is characterized by a break from the past. All tradition is suspect and novelty is pursued for its own sake. That attitude of rejecting the past is certainly reflected in the history of LCWR, it's speakers and its positions. Donna Steichen outlined numerous heretical activities of the group in her 1996 book Ungodly Rage: The Hidden Face of Catholic Feminism. The '70s marked a radical departure by the LCWR from traditional charity (the works of mercy) to espousing women's rights including the Equal Rights Amendment, female ordination, women's empowerment, goddess worship, and a decidedly non-Catholic approach to "social justice." In 1986, LCWR held a "think tank" which issued papers written by teams that summarized LCWR's principles. Steichen says the essays:
disclose a desperately uncertain religious vision, only tenuously related to the "symbol" of Jesus Christ, which looks to a feminist version of "liberation" for the world's earthly salvation. The notes and reading lists constitute a coprehensive bibliography in feminist theology.But the extremism of LCWR isn't just historical. If people want to see how loopy the LCWR continues to be, they have merely to look at the keynote speaker scheduled for LCWR's 2012 August meeting. Barbara Marx Hubbard's address is titled Mystery Unfolding: Speaking in the Evolutionary Now. Hubbard teaches a program called Agents of Conscious Evolution the purpose of which is to transform individuals to:
become a powerful catalyst of conscious evolution and play a role in one of the most exciting events ever envisioned: a planetary Birth Day on December 22, 2012. This day will help us shift beyond fearful separation toward a global sense of oneness, symbolically marking the start of a new era in human development....This intense and often emotional drama has one powerful solution: our conscious evolution as a species. We have within us extraordinary creative potentials that have yet to be massively unleashed, leading to wide-scale cooperation, innovation, sustainability and peace. The solutions are available; it is only the human software that needs an upgrade.This says it all as far as LCWR is involved. Jesus' new covenant wasn't enough, but we need to "evolve" through a new age course in "conscious evolution" that makes us "co-creators" of the "next stage for humanity" to be welcomed on December 22, 2012. Hubbard's program is the same type of new age nonsense promoted by Marianne Williamson, Echhart Tolle, and Oprah Winfrey. In fact, Hubbard participated with Williamson and Tolle last February in the Global Alliance for Transformational Entertainment. Take a look at Hubbard's video below and then read the description of her course on the website. Hubbard has a background as a liberal and at the 1984 Democratic Convention, 204 delegates placed her name in token nomination for Vice President. (Walter Mondale and Geraldine Ferraro were on the ticket that year.) Hubbard is also a proponent of population control and has frequently written about it in her books. Her initial work with conscious evolution was funded by the Rockefellers. Reading what she says about herself is eye-opening and it is clear that she is as far from Catholic teaching as one can be. She believes Eve was correct in disobeying God to seek knowledge and describes hearing an "inner voice" that told her, "I will not let you die." (Do you hear the hissing?) That the LCWR would invite this woman to keynote their annual meeting epitomizes their misguided activities over the past forty years. They are unregenerate in their dissent and scandal.
TO BE CONTINUED....
I wonder why the treachery and betrayal by women religious seems to sting more than that of the men's? The "fairer sex", "man's better nature"?
I have been reading everything I can about this and from every perspective (The Wanderer, America, Commonweal, National Catholic Register--every side) and I am with the nuns until they clean up that rats' nest in Rome they call the Curia the Cardinals and bishops have lost their moral credibility, the nuns--despite whatever craziness they are accuesed of, are walking the walk
I'm sending them my checks that I used to give to the diocese for its campaigns
Thanks for your article. I was unaware of how long the LCWR has been around and busily undermining the truths of the Catholic faith. Pro-life author Randy Engel, author of "The Rite of Sodomy," had enough material left from her research to write a second book called "Sisters in Rebellion." Meanwhile the Holy Spirit is at work and these rebellious orders are dying, while orders that wear the habit and practice the traditional religious life are thriving and receiving young vocations.
The efforts of the LCWR have been aided by the "boring from within" of such radical groups as the Catholic Worker. Dorothy Day never gave up her belief in a "Catholic Communism." She considered the loss of the Vatican States in the 19th century to be the pruning of the Holy Spirit. She presented St. Francis as a champion of pacifism, because he did want members of the third order to serve in the military. Day neglected to mention his qualifying statement that this exemption applied only as long as their not serving did not conflict with the common good of society or with the defense of the Catholic Church. She also confused the unwary, of whom I was one, with her statement that she would stop publishing if Cardinal Spellman asked her to. Since she never stopped publishing, I assumed she must be orthodox. Biographies of Day and Michael Harrington reveal that she defied or evaded such requests more than once. She wrote that she would conform to the Church's teaching on morality, but declared herself an independent in most other areas, such as labor, politics, and world affairs. (The stance of the LCWR seems similar.) These details can be found in Carol Byrne's 2010 work "The Catholic Worker Movement (1933-1980): A Critical Analysis." This is probably the only major work on Day and the CW that is not written by a friend, co-worker, admirer, or fellow traveler. Dr. Byrne's thoroughly documented supplementary notes are posted on the blog "Dorothy Day Another Way" available at dorothydayworker.blogspot.com.
Anonymous 10:14, that makes about as much sense as supporting rival gangs. The heretical nuns blowing sulphur here in the U.S. are just as bad as the curia who brought the sulphur into the Vatican.
I'm all for supporting the nuns -- the real ones like the Sisters of Mother Mary of the Eucharist or the Sisters of Life.
But hey, different strokes for silly folks.
Jesus said by their fruits you will know them. Cardinal Law is behind this LCWR thing--what fruits did he leave? Just ask the people in Boston, Grand Knight Carl Anderson who makes over a million dollars a year with the Kof C is behind this. What fruits does he leave--the Vatican bank scandal. I take Jesus seriously and while I love the Church I don't confuse it with those corrupt bureaucrats in Rome who are persecuting the nuns. I have known the nuns for 72 years and I am with them. and so is everyone else I know in our parish including the auxiliary bishop who is our pastor
Interesting...when I was growing up my mom taught respect for everyone in a habit or a Roman collar. Instead of teaching me to discriminate between good nuns and priests (those who believe and obey the doctrine of the Church) and bad priests and nuns (those who do not believe and obey the doctrine of the Church), I learned blind obedience.
Well...now I'm a grownup and I use my reason to discriminate between faithful clergy and religious and unfaithful clergy and religious. (Cardinal Law should be in jail.)
The LCWR has a long record of being unfaithful including selecting a keynote speaker for their August meeting who is a liberal new ager who believes Eve did the right thing when she listened to the serpent and favors population control. She preaches a message that is not only not Catholic, but not Christian. Since you are "with them" I presume you have no problem with this. When I'm 72 I hope I'm more sensible than to consider someone honest, holy, and faithful just because she is addressed as "Sister."
As for your statements about Cardinal Law and the Knights of Columbus being behind the "LCWR thing" - do you have any evidence to back that up. I haven't seen anything connecting the cardinal or the K of C with the nuns or the bank scandal.
Mary Ann, concerning your post to Annonymous on June 9 at 11:17PM, I say you are exactly right. Two wrongs have never made a right and never will.
This woman is a Gnostic, which is an age-old heresy that disbelieves in the Old and New Testament and the God of the Testaments. She, like Oprah Winfrey, has created her own god in her own image. To them there is really no such thing as sin, except what they consider wrong at various times. They are also relativists, you know -- all morality is relative. In other words, when taken to it logical conclusion, nothing is really wrong. That is how they can justify killing a child in the womb for any reason. Some of them cannot even tell you when life begins, and many of them think that children who are born with defects should not be allowed to live even after they are born if their lives have no "quality". Catholic they are not. They are not even Orthodox Jews. Because they will not even listen to the teachings of the Fathers of the Church or the more orthodox rabbis, they have no concept of what the Holy Bible teaches or why.
By the way, I -- annonymous at 2:00AM on June 11 -- am a woman. I had plenty of contact with women such as these, who often were baptized and called themselves Catholic, at public schools. Many of them were really into astrology, Ying and Yang, Silvia Brown and other such occult activities. What was laughable and ironic was that some of them thought I was "weird" because I had never used the birthcontrol pill for contraception, but I thought they were "weird" because they thought calling up the dead and casting a horoscope were just "groovy" and scientific. Another irony is that I was more in agreement on those issues with Carl Sagan, the atheist. Of course Sagan and I were in disagreement on whether or not there were actual spirits of the dead. God does have a sense of humor.
Carl Sagan, by the way, was a leading astronomer before he died for those who do not know about him. I did like to listen to his programs, in spite of the fact that he was an atheist, because he was very good at putting astronomy terms and facts into lay language.
Post a Comment