Dissatisfaction with Investigations, Episode 2

The American women religious weren’t too impressed the the CDF investigation of LCWR. How did they put it?

(T)he assessment was based on unsubstantiated accusations and the result of a flawed process that lacked transparency.

CNS reported today that four of Cardinal Dolan’s episcopal brothers across the Atlantic weren’t too impressed with his investigation of Irish seminaries:

(A preliminary report) contained some serious errors of fact, including named individuals. Attentive to the importance of applying due process, and respecting the rights of those named in this initial report, the trustees made a detailed and considered response to the Holy See.

The Irish Times piece quoted the bishops as refering to the errors not as “serious”, but “significant.” More from that report:

A disturbingly significant number of seminarians gave a negative assessment of the atmosphere of the house.

(Staff were) critical about any emphasis on Rome, tradition, the magisterium, piety or assertive orthodoxy, while the students are enthusiastic about these features.

“A change in the staff was recommended,” cites the article. Well of course it was. Seminarians trend to being more conservative than their teachers. That seems to be a source of discontentment. The suggested solution is interesting, in that it would seem to minimize truth-telling. If indeed we accept the role of bishops and theologians as knowing better than students.

Elsewhere the report said: “The apostolic visitor noted, and heard from students, an ‘anti-ecclesial bias’ in theological formation.”

Cardinal Dolan did comment:

While obviously others do not consider themselves bound by the promised confidentiality — so necessary and understandable to assure a fair and honest gathering of information (and) requested by the Apostolic See — I certainly do.

Apparently all those discussions on having a USCCB spokesperson have gotten to the Jovial One. Is that a bit of snark directed toward some brother bishops?

I wasn’t privy to the details of this report. So I don’t have an oar in this river. Do you suppose the Irish bishops’ protest will be heard with more consideration than that of the Tuesday delegation to Cardinal Levada? Stay tuned.


About catholicsensibility

Todd lives in the Pacific Northwest, serving a Catholic parish as a lay minister.
This entry was posted in Church News, Ministry, Other Places. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Dissatisfaction with Investigations, Episode 2

  1. John Drake says:

    “Do you suppose the Irish bishops’ protest will be heard with more consideration than that of the Tuesday delegation to Cardinal Levada?”

    And have the lovely sisters given ANY indication that THEY are open to what Cd Levada and the CDF have to say?

    Here’s an interesting observation on the sisters’ approach, from Fr. Z:


    • Jimmy Mac says:

      Oh, yes, “Fr.” Z – a definitely neutral observer in all of this, isn’t he?

    • Jimmy Mac says:

      Would the CDF and Levada be open to the kind of investigation of THEIR stumblings and bumblings by the LCWR or any other non-clerical group?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s