We realized, by our return to the Gospel and to our own foundations, that we were called to much more radical [meaning in-depth] renewal than surface adjustments of lifestyle. (So prior women religious orders before the 70's didn't have in-depth commitment? Not one of the centuries of these communities went beyond 'surface adjustments of lifestyle?') There is no going back. But I think we may have to claim this, calmly and firmly, in the face of this now organized effort to get us back into the older form. (In other words, you don't want to even consider anything that the Vatican may suggest.) We are as different from "apostolic Religious Congregations” [such as those represented by the Council of Major Superiors of Women Religious, or CMSWR] (of whom the Vatican is much more approving) as the mendicants were from the Benedictine monks. The big difference is that they [apostolic Religious Congregations] read Perfectae Caritatis and did what it asked: deepened their spirituality (I hope), and did some updating -- shorter habits, a more flexible schedule, dropping customs that were merely weird, etc. (Would that have included praying the rosary? Studying the lives of the saints? However, I suppose it's not 'weird' to include a drumming circle.) We read Perfectae Caritatis through the lenses of Gaudium et Spes and Lumen Gentium and we were called out of the monastic/apostolic mode and into the world that Gaudium et Spes declared the Church was embracing after centuries of world rejection. (Called out? Then why take the vows? Why commit your life to one of separation? If you feel you are called into the world then perhaps you missed your vocation to begin with and should have remained within the laity.)
The IHM community envisions and is committed to bringing about the dream of God on planet Earth through respect for, nurturing of and promoting the liberation and well-being of all persons and all of nature as God's good creation.
“The reality of this polarization is more than regrettable; it is a cause of scandal. It is a counter-sign. We are called to be vivid, visible signs of the kingdom and to attract others to Christ and his Church by the joyful witness of our consecrated lives.”
This polarization continues abetted by bishops unwilling to confront progressive religious, she said.
Part of the problem was timing, she said. The 1960s and 1970s were the worst times to initiate reforms, given the turmoil and strife that marked those decades. This was especially true, considering the Second Vatican Council’s emphasis on the apostolic at the expense of the monastic, she said.
Because much of the apostolic impulse was expressed through participation in social justice crusades, after religious had finished fighting for civil rights or to end the Vietnam War, they turned the tactics and revolutionary fervor towards perceived injustices inside the Church, she said.
The other aspect of the problem was that Church leaders underestimated the strength of radical feminism in the United States, she said. This strain of feminism is no longer a part of the conversation in civil society, but it remains ascendant within religious communities, she said.
And that, my friends, is the crux of the matter. Feminism. In its most radical form, it is not only a renouncement of God's divine order of authority, but defiance. It is straight from the pit of hell if you examine it closely. Who raised his fist against God, demanding to be worshipped? Who is the father of disobedience? Who whispered in the ear of Eve and purred, "Did God really say...?" Who tempted Eve and then Adam with the proposition that they didn't need God, they could reach enlightenment on their own?