Before finishing their Aug. 7-10 meeting in St. Louis, the nuns of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious conferred the group’s “highest honor” on a former faculty member at the Jesuit School of Theology in Berkeley.
While most news items about the St. Louis meeting focused on the LCWR’s reaction to a Vatican call for reform of the organization, buried at the end of a news release from the LCWR was the following:
“The assembly closed with the conferring of LCWR’s highest honor, its Outstanding Leadership Award, on Sister Sandra Schneiders, IHM, a theologian and professor emerita at the Jesuit School of Theology in Berkeley, California.”
Who is Sister Schneiders? According to the website of the Jesuit School of Theology, she is a “professor emerita” who specialized in New Testament Studies and Christian Spirituality. But Sr. Schneiders has done much more than teach at Berkeley’s Jesuit School of Theology. She has also been a national leader in urging her fellow women religious to rebel against the Vatican.
In 2009, Sister Schneiders, a sister of the Servants of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, called on her fellow nuns to give a cold shoulder to visitors from the Vatican conducting a study of U.S. women’s religious orders, calling those carrying out the visitations “uninvited guests who should be received in the parlor, not given the run of the house.”
On Jan. 30, 2009, the Vatican announced it was launching a series of on-site visits to “look into the quality of life” of women’s religious communities in the U.S. In a private email message to “colleagues and friends” obtained by the National Catholic Reporter and later published with Sister Schneiders’ permission, she said, “I do not put any credence at all in the claim that this is friendly, transparent, aimed to be helpful, etc. It is a hostile move and the conclusions are already in. It is meant to be intimidating.”
“We cannot, of course, keep them from investigating,” Sister Schneiders continued. “But we can receive them, politely and kindly, for what they are, uninvited guests who should be received in the parlor, not given the run of the house. When people ask questions they shouldn’t ask, the questions should be answered accordingly. I just hope we will not, as we American Religious so often do, think that by total ‘openness’ and efforts to ‘dialogue’ we are going to bring about mutual understanding and acceptance. This is not mutual and it is not a dialogue. The investigators are not coming to understand — believe me, we found that out in the seminary investigation. So let’s be honest but reserved, supply no ammunition that can be aimed at us, be non-violent even in the face of violence, but not be naive.”
Sister Schneiders called the visitations “a fake war being stirred up by the Vatican at the instigation of the frightened” and advised her colleagues against getting involved in it. “Also, what is the worst thing that can happen from this investigation?” she asked. “They are surely not going to shut down 95% of the Religious Congregations in this country, even if they’d like to, any more than they closed all the seminaries that were not teaching 19th century moral theology or buying the official line that the clergy sex abuse scandal was caused, not by corrupt bishops protecting pedophile priests, but by homosexuals in seminaries.”
In 2010, Sister Schneiders wrote a defiant five-part series for the National Catholic Reporter about the visitations and the confrontation between the LCWR and the Vatican that led to the “doctrinal assessment” published in April of this year by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. That assessment found serious theological and doctrinal errors on the part of the LCWR, and called for its reform.
Why do you call her “sister”? It is scary that in hell, there is a very special place for fallen away catholics, the very place that Judas opened up, with even a more horrendous place of suffering for those that gave their life to Jesus, but only under their will, not His Will. We need to keep praying and fasting for our priests and sisters that not one of them will fall into the pits of hell, nor have to suffer the pains of purgatory, but, that instead, they will all be holy as God wants them to be and they can lead us into holiness. +JMJ+
There you have it. Ms. Schneiders encourages religious to rebel against Authentic Catholic Teaching and embrace violations violations of the Catholic Faith such as: abortion, euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, same-sex marriage, government-coerced secularism, and socialism.
The LCWR is clearly not in communion with The Catholic Church.
SoCal, the article did not state her support for any of the things you listed. Please read it again! This is not a site for talk-show ranting, but for intilectual questioning and discussion.
What Ms. Shneiders really said is ancient and is in Genesis: “I WILL NOT SERVE”!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
Where is that in Genesis?
At the beginning, k.
Could you give me the chapter and verse?
JLS:
Can you quote the chapter and verse? My Book of Genesis begins with:
Gosh I can’t find “I will not serve” in the entire book. Are you sure your aren’t mistaken? Don’t you think it might be in one of the prophetic books?
The expression “non serviam” or “I will not serve,” is found in Jeremiah 2:20 (‘Long ago you broke your yoke, you tore off your bonds. You said, “I will not serve”’), where it refers to the unfaithful people of Israel, but the expression is often used to characterize the rebellion of Lucifer. John Milton’s Paradise Lost has Lucifer say, “Better to reign in Hell, than serve in Heaven.”
We need to listen to the Vicar of Christ, and follow his lead, and not our own. When nuns or priests become “”would be” Vicars of Christ they find themselves out of the flolk., Priests and nuns beware!..Take care of the sheep, don’t scatter them.
“uninvited guests who should be received in the parlor, not given the run of the house.”
how very hilarious!
sounds like the old days, when outsiders, especially MALES, were certainly not allowed into the convent.
after all, you never know what those wild men might be up to…
… in the seminaries?
Turf these disobedient man-like crones.They preach another gospel and promote abortion and so-called same-sex “marriage”.Get it OVER with-these apostates are conducting a media war to create an AMChurch.
Ms Schneiders does not understand the meaning of obedience. To rebel against the the Pope, the vicar of Christ is to rebel against God himself. It must have been satin himself who gave her such a high honor. What nerve to call herself (Sister). These rebellious have done so much harm to our church. I do believe it’s time to remove them from catholic church ministries for good. For those who don’t understand you can read books such as Ungodly Rage, etc. I can’t wait until they are all gone.
Maybe she sees it that the Pope is rebelling against her.
She’d look impressive with a beard.
She’d look like Santa Claus with a beard.
Not a surprise LCWR… Leading Conference of Wiccan Revolutionaries….
It might be best for this organization to be dismissed for their work, they have done all that the Church has ask, and can stand no more, and therefore have outlived their usefulness. The question about where they are going is obvious when they confer honors on such dissenters of the Church. There are other organizations that reflect true Church policy, and the opportunity to join those ranks is more than obvious. I am happy to know that the Church is making it clear that they will have this organization and every other, truly reflect Truth, Who is Jesus. The LCWR has outlived its usefulness, time to put that one away.
Yes, they have outlived their usefulness.
The Vatican gave them every opportunity to be Catholic.
Since they choose not to be Catholic and merely continue playing games, they need to leave.
I am tempted to think she has left the faith of our fathers.
What exactly is wrong with “19th century moral theology”?
“What exactly is wrong with 19th century moral theology” is a good question, and relevant to Sr. Schneider’s publications… A few examples come to mind; I’m sure others could contribute more:
Chattel slavery and human trafficking were accepted, or at least not condemned as strongly as today. For example, Pope Pius IX affirmed that it was not always sinful to purchase or sell people.
Galileo and a few other people were condemned for claiming as true statements which contradicted a literal interpretation of holy scripture.
“Americanism” and the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution were considered evil, since the state would not enforce the Catholic faith. Democracy as a system of government was generally suspect.
No theology of the body.
Women religious were required to be monastic. If you look up Leo XIII and “Conditae a Christo” you find that in 1900 the types of communities women could form were broadened beyond cloistered monasticism. Pius XII expanded the range of roles they could play further.
Francis, is that true that Pope Pius IX affirmed that it was not always sinful to purchase or sell people? This is very difficult for me to believe. To me the selling of people is intrinsically evil.
Mark:
Let’s not lose track of the original question: “What exactly is wrong with 19th century moral theology?”
Pius IX was a friend of Jefferson Davis, was the only European head of state to recognize the Confederacy and apparently approved the Holy Office’s 1866 Instruction that “Slavery itself, considered as such in its essential nature, is not at all contrary to the natural and divine law, and there can be several just titles of slavery and these are referred to by approved theologians and commentators of the sacred canons…it is not contrary to the natural and divine law for a slave to be sold, bought, exchanged or donated.”
In modern moral theology, the taking, holding and selling of human beings is considered an intrinsic evil. At least in 1866, it was not.
That is very sobering. It is troubling to hear a Pope support slavery in such a manner. I can imagine the nuns of that time not agreeing with that.
I don’t hold it particularly against Pius IX; he was human, and served from within what he could see with a 19th century perspective and 19th century theology. Today, our later (hopefully more developed) perspective allows us (ahem,… most of us!) to see things that were not at all obvious 150 years ago.
What I find especially interesting is that the rightly lionized “nuns of the Old American West” who founded Catholic schools and nursed in Catholic hospitals, were ministering extra-canonically at the time! They were more radically outside canon law of their time than Sr. Schneiders could possibly be today. In 1900, Pope Leo XIII promulgated changes to the status of women religious which effectively “legalized” their ministry outside cloistered monasteries. Later changes made before Vatican II encouraged the sisters to continue their un-cloiserted ministries. Per pre-1900 canon law, all those school teaching, patient comforting radicals belonged in convents.
So let me get this straight: The LCWR issues a “gift to the Church” statement proclaiming their willingness to particpate in “open, honest dialogue” with the Bishop assigned to help them. But, before their convention ends they give the highest honor to one of their own who refused cooperation with Christ and his Church. Indeed, she urged her fellow members to oppose the Church’s visitation even before it began. It is exactly this kind of hostility that has ruled in the LCWR for 40 years and FINALLY produced a proper response from the Church. These are not our grandparents’ Nuns, people.
This honor is the LCWR’s response to Rome and their willingness to go down swinging. And, it seems to me, they are going down. I have encountered lay women whose anger toward the Church is, well, most deep and heartfelt. In such conversations, it is clear to me nothing I can say is going to change anything. Once the radical feminist ideology take hold it is like a barnacle attached to the soul.
Dan, what is “the radical feminist ideology?” Can you give us a list of 3-5 charecteristics of radical feminism?
Just to clarify, the report from the visitations has not been released yet. The doctrinal assessment of the LCWR is a separate issue.
This ‘woman’ certainly seems pleased with herself…rather like an ape leader as she leads her minions on their way into the jaws of hell. Her arrogance and malicious mischief are written all over her face and in her body language. No, I do not see the face of Jesus, nor do I see His goodness shining out through eyes of love and caring. I see a hard worldly person that thinks she is mistress of all she surveys. When I think of the inner beauty of blessed Mother Theresa or the gentleness and goodness of Saint Gianna Molla, I feel genuinely sad for this person and all of the people she’s led astray. It reminds me of a dear woman I met once at an EWTN conference a few years ago who was so grateful to God for getting her away from feminism. “When I think I might have ended up another Bella Abzug, I am so thankful!” Poor, poor Ms Schneiders. Perhaps I do see the face of Jesus, but He is weeping.
Dana, you saw all that in that one photo? You did not see a picture of a very well educated person, sitting in the library/office of her school, with a rye smile on her face and …. ? You must have hidden powers to assess the worst in people. Enough already! What did she say that was wrong. That is the gist of the article, not her pose.
An “ape leader”? Wow, so much for Christian charity. I have never heard of a religious sister referred to as that. Sister Sandra is an older woman with gray hair, I find your comment to be a slam against the elderly, Dana. If Sister Sandra was a young and attractive woman in a medieval habit, I wonder if you would have referred to her as an “ape leader”?
PA why should we show charity to a woman who is part of a group of people who have been dissenting on Church teachings FOR DECADES..women like this are still considered part of the Church while the those adhering to Church teachings (SSPX) are not….hypocrisy at its worst
“why should we show charity to a woman who is part of a group of people who have been dissenting on Church teachings FOR DECADES”?
First, because Our Lord commanded it unconditionally (“love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you”). Nobody’s hypocrisy can justify anyone’s un-charity.
The second and more immediately practical reason is: Because all of us (me included) are part of a group of people who have been dissenting on Church teachings FOR CENTURIES. Different people, different “difficult” teachings, different groups. If you say, “that’s not me” I invite you to do a more thorough examination of conscience. That’s why we have the sacrament of Reconciliation.
Well Francis I DO NOT DISSENT from Church teaching furthermore I do not encourage others to do so, much unlike this so called Nun. I will make you a deal Francis, I will show this so called Nun respect when you the droves of liberal Catholics show respect to Church tradition, the TLM and the SSPX,, how’s that sound fair…
all the liberal filled with Nuance
There you go again, Canisius! The SSPX does not respect Catholic teachings or Catholic Tradition. The support what use to be Catholic teachings but are no more.
Bob one tell me where they do not support Church tradition, It is your pathetic Vatican 2 crowd that demolished Great Catholic tradition in name of “tolerance” and making protestants feel comfortable. Think I am wrong, tell me why were there 6 protestant advising modernist on how to destroy the Mass of Pius VI. Bob One do you honestly believe the Church is stronger and more powerful moral voice in the world since Vatican 2.
We traditionalist will be proclaiming the Gospel of Christ after your failed Vatican 2 generation has turned to dust…I hope your are alive to witness it so you will watch all your progressive hopes vanish into thin air……BTW the Church’s teaching are unchanging despite your crowd’s best efforts….St. Pope Pius X Pray for Us and crush the modernists
What you don’t like Bob One about SSPX is that have not bought into the modernist poison of the results of Vatican 2,, you cannot stand the fact that there those of us who have legitimate concerns and question about the results and implementation of the Council teaching..It will take generations but what needs to happen is the complete removal of modernist influence in the Church, if that means people like you Bob leave all the better
I also find the “ape leader” reference seriously offensive.
Youtube has several videos up to 8 minutes, where you can see what kind of leader Sr. Schneiders really is. Just go to Youtube and search on “Sandra Schneiders”.
There’s another, younger, blonder newswoman named Sandra Schneiders as well (in German: “echt heiß!”). Her outfits are anything but medieval, and I don’t know how well-versed she is in theology.
I find it fitting not offensive……
Actually, Canisius, the SSPX does dissent from Church teaching. That is why some of their leaders were excommunicated by Pope John Paul II. Pope Benedict XVI has tried to reach out to this group but some in the SSPX are still not satisfied. Some people in the SSPX group are anti-Semitic and they probably will stay outside the Church even if the Vatican allows the SSPX back into the good graces of the Church.
PA, a. being anti-semitic is not a doctrinal issue. b. SSPX bishops are not excommunicated. c. most Catholic bishops are not satisfied with much of what the Pope reaches out to them about, such as becoming holy. So, once again your attempted deceptions are thwarted.
PA I guess you get your information from the National Catholic distorter, let me school you on the facts. First the leaders of SSPX were not excommunicated for dissenting on Church teaching or doctrine but making ordinations without an OK from the Vatican, second the excommunications were lifted 5 years ago. Have you met anyone part of SSPX, do you know for a fact they are anti-semitic, (though I will cede that WIlliamson probably is) and how do define that term anyway. Antisemitism is a hatred for Jews because they are Jews, not because of their rejection of Christ. It cannot be denied that some secular jewish organizations(ie ADL) has made of efforts to strip this nation of its Christian identity in the name of tolerance. That is what upsets us traditionalist, as it should ALL Catholics
Lastly, when I visit Paris it is their chapel st nicolas du chardonnet is filled with young people for standard Sunday Masses. Meanwhile, Notre Dame Cathedral had barely enough people to field a baseball team. Finally under 10 percent of Catholics in France attend weekly mass, but of that 10 percent nearly 85 percent attend TLM, dominated by attendance to SSPX chapels, that pretty much says it all..Any comparison to members of SSPX adherence to Church teachings to that of this grey haired nun would be laughable if it were not so tragic.
I would submit that a further description of “ape leader” is called for. Wiki: Apes are Old World anthropoid mammals, more specifically a clade of tailless catarrhine primates. Yes, I can see this clearly now.
Canisius and JLS, Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunications of the SSPX bishops but did not recognize them as bishops of the Roman Catholic Church. So those bishops are not part of the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church.
Yes PA they are Catholic Bishops, more so than many of those here in the US and they actual adhere to Catholic teaching which cannot be said like the grey haired nun in the above story..your modernist attempts have failed once again
CANISIUS, wow, you really seem to hate women.
what’s the deal?
just because a woman is old (with gray hair) and doesn’t spend a million bucks to have some fancy hair-do, this doesn’t make her evil.
the SISTERS OF SOCIAL SERVICE, founded in 1926, did not wear fancy habits, but “arrived on the scene wearing simple gray dresses at a time when nuns wore long black veils and stayed in their convents. And these new sisters didn’t stay in their little home either. Sister Frederica was seen on the streets around the Cathedral at Second and Main, visiting families and finding food and clothing for the very poor. She went about without a companion, observing no law of cloister, because the Community saw itself as called to be in the world, at the service of the world, called to “go about doing good”, as Jesus did.”
this is from their website — and from the 1920’s, so don’t blame vatican two.
Canisius, the SSPX bishops are not Catholic bishops-maybe someday. But as of now, they and all the SSPX priests are suspended, which means they have no clerical status in the Catholic Church.
Canisius, you may think that the SSPX bishops are more Catholic than some of the bishops in the US but Pope Benedict XVI obviously does not think so as he has not given them assignments as bishops in the Roman Catholic Church.
max– I gave a response but it was not printed, I do not hate women I just don’t accept the feminist nonsense that has infected this culture.. and yes I will attack when I see it. When I see women like this, they remind me of a dark and abusive past, so I react according… call it collective guilt on their part…….
They are bishops consecrated by the late Archbishop Lebebvre. These bishops in turn have ordained many many priests, and they all celebrate valid Sacraments. This could not be the case if these bishops were not Catholic bishops, because there is “one holy catholic and apostolic church”.
Thank you JLS, SSPX sacraments are valid just as those in the Eastern Orthodox Church are considered valid by canon law. People PA and other modernists think these grey haired old women and their OPEN dissent of Church teaching can actually be compared to those good priests and laity who are part of SSPX who are striving their best to keep Catholic teaching rather than openly flout it. Like I previously stated go to Paris where modernism controls everything and see who has more attendance local parishes or SSPX chapels?
My stomach aches..
This is what happens when Clergy, Nuns, and Theologians are not required to study the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition” as a required part of their formation.
Garbage in, garbage out.
The LCWR is lead by heretics and schismatics. The Vatican is giving them the opportunity to be Catholic, otherwise they should leave the Catholic Church.
If your mother-in-law came uninvited to visit you with an agenda to “help” when your household was in order following its charism and mission in accordance with your marriage vows, such a visit would be suspect from the start. Treating the mother-in-law politely without over-indulging her secret agenda is proper; and getting all family members on the same page is appropriate. How jealously petty it is to try to dishonor Sister’s achievements.
I don’t get it…your point is?
“I don’t get it…your point is?” …Exactly the point! Your expectations of how nuns serve all of us is so different from Cheryls, from Sr. Schneiders’ and from mine, that you don’t see what’s so obvious to us. I can’t imagine how to explain it anymore than I can imagine how to explain the flavor of passion fruit ice cream to someone who’s never tasted a passion fruit.
Ah Francis always non-servium eh?? just like these grey haired nuns.. but I have some bad news for you.. the younger orders are the ones filled with traditional/orthodox sisters, who will send a shiver down the spine of the Joan Chittister types, they know it and NOT being replaced by nuns like themselves…Deos Gratias
Canisius:
Why do you say orders “filled with traditional/orthodox sisters … will send a shiver down the spine of the Joan Chittister types” or anyone else’s? I can only imagine traditional orders’ growth and prosperity as a source of joy all around. Did Sr. Joan write something about the topic?
Well Francis do you honestly believe that a woman who spent a lifetime dissenting against Church teaching will find joy in the fact the younger sister coming into the convents REJECT her ideas and dissent. It is my hope that Chittister and her ilk will very soon become just a bad and soon to be forgotten memory….Christ is King
Canisius:
None of the “radial feminist nuns” I know are even trying to participate in some kind of contest with other nuns. It would be like a Latin-rite Catholic feeling threatened if younger Catholics join a Byzantine-rite parish or attend an extraordinary-form Mass. All of us are still Catholic.
When’s the last time you actually talked with a nun? Have you ever had a nun as a spiritual director? I suspect you’d find someone much more unconditionally loving and accepting of you than you can imagine in your happiest dreams.
Francis I am glad the feminist nuns (oxymoron) are not in a contest with the younger traditional nuns because they would lose. Yes I have had the rather unfortunate experience of dealing with a few grey haired angry nuns. As I posted some time back at a previous parish where I no longer attend, I purposely challenged the nun who called herself a liturgical expert. I asked why was the symbol of “gay liberation” (rainbow flag) hanging on the wall inside the Church. Since I was given an answer without any logic, I took it upon myself to purchase a portrait of the Virgin Mary and the Christ child and removed the blasphemous flag and replaced it with the portrait and I made sure she knew I did it. She went nuts and the pastor a nice old man but weak asked me not to return the parish.
About a year later the old pastor retired and was replaced by a young orthodox priest friendly to Church tradition, within about 3 weeks the grey haired nun was kicked to the curb and all modern influences have since been removed, and the portrait I bought sits there today. I see this as victory over the menace that has invaded the Church, a menace that you seem to have great affinity for.
As some who suffered abuse at the hands of his mother and her “partner,” I would not trust a woman to be my spiritual director or direct anything in my life. I do not need unconditional acceptance or love, just the respect that a man deserves.
Canisius:
I apologize. You had already related the story and I’d forgotten about it. It wasn’t my intention to dredge up the past for you with a question which, in retrospect, I could have answered for myself.
OOORRAAAHHHH!!!
Francis no need to apologize….. Christ’s Peace be with you…
cheryl – very well put!
National Catholic Register had a reporter at the meeting. There is a good article on it.
A fun image relating to nuns of the American West can be found if one does a google images search on “nunswithgunsforterrorist” and “scottthong”. It would be interesting if someone more familiar with the history of rifle production could help date these photos of sisters packing some serious heat!
Fun because, as I alluded earlier, before 1900 the sisters were all supposed to lead cloistered lives, and the sight of sisters bearing arms would probably have made somebody in the Vatican pee in his pants. I don’t think the nunneries had indoor rifle ranges, but I do wish my parochial school teachers had taught taught us all to shoot straight.
Red Ryder BB guns, Francis. Glad to read that you’re planning on becoming a straight shooter.
As for you comment that Vatican clergy would “pee in their pants” at the sight of guns, you would do well to read the historical book “The Pope’s Legion”, about the Zouaves. One of these heroic papal fighters died with Custer at the Little Big Horn. Upon noticing his papal medal, they left him unscalped, the only one, as a sign honoring of the religion of Christ.
Not the at the sight of the guns, genius: At the sight of the nuns wielding the guns, when they were supposed to be in a cloister.
JLS .. Chief Sitting Bull later in his life converted to Catholicism and is buried in a Catholic cemetery.
A guest is always greeted in the parlor, a polite visitor never demands access it is considered very rude!! In this case the VATICAN could use a course from, Miss Manner, that would be redeeming!!!
The guns might have been hand me downs from the Swiss Guards in the Vatican. Francis, you should look into whether those nuns practiced firing those guns.
“nuns with guns!”
what a great motto for a new religious order.
JLS, you could do your yosemite sam impersaonation, complete with your six guns, and be their spiritual adivsor! i’d vote for you…