Nuns stunned after being ordered by the Vatican to get back on the straight and narrow

A LEADING American organisation of Catholic nuns – the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR) – has been severely rapped following a Vatican investigation which found that it was spending too much time on trivial issues such as poverty and social justice and not enough on raising hell over gay marriage and abortion.

The LCWR, which has around 1,500 members in the US,  says on its website that it was left stunned by the findings of Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF, formerly the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Roman and Universal Inquisition. In 1981 a certain Joseph Ratzinger was appointed to head the Inquisition).

Pope Ratzinger once headed the Inquisition

The CDF said in its findings, published this week:

While there has been a great deal of work on the part of LCWR promoting issues of social justice in harmony with the Church’s social doctrine, it is silent on the right to life from conception to natural death … Further, issues of crucial importance in the life of the Church and society, such as the Church’s Biblical view of family life and human sexuality, are not part of the LCWR agenda in a way that promotes Church teaching.

The naughty nuns also stand accused of issuing occasional statements:

That disagree with or challenge positions taken by the Bishops, who are the Church’s authentic teachers of faith and morals.

The CDF thundered:

This is not compatible with its purpose.

And it pointed out:

The Assessment reveals serious doctrinal problems which affect many in Consecrated life …

In a sinister, Mafia-like move, the Vatican has called in a trio of “heavies” to knock the wayward nuns back into line. Archbishop Peter Sartain of Seattle has been named the CDF’s  “Archbishop Delegate” for the kick-ass initiative, assisted by Bishop Leonard Blair and Bishop Thomas John Paprocki.

It will be the task of the Archbishop Delegate to work collaboratively with the officers of the LCWR to achieve the goals outlined in this document, and to report on the progress of this to the Holy See …. In this way, the Holy See hopes to offer an important contribution to the future of religious life in the Church in the United States.

Hat tip: Robert Stovold


63 responses to “Nuns stunned after being ordered by the Vatican to get back on the straight and narrow”

  1. Equality Jack says:

    Alright, bear with me a moment as I revise and extend my remarks.

    I do indeed engage in exaggeration and hyperbole on occasion, so I will apologize to all and sundry for failing to include the proper modifiers and disclaimers that would have made my posts much more accurate in their descriptions of the predatory and criminal nature of the Catholic delusion and it’s “adherents” who, in many cases, are quite decent people on the whole, yet go through life suffering a great malady and who are victims of the Catholic delusion and it’s “blind” adherents.

    In the interests of maintaining a calm dialogue, I will also apologize for my wickedly nasty suggestions wherever they may be on the Internet and this website, but only insofar as they might cause feelings of undue apprehension on the part of the readers, even though they are my honest expressions of frustration at a certain class of personality traits of certain other people, whose names I will refrain from mentioning as they are quite numerous and often anonymous and should therefore not, logically, feel apprehension from another anonymous poster as that would be an unreasonable sort and unsupportable using simple logic.

    Much of what I have written, almost every bit of it, is still quite valid as written and as such does not need any modifiers or disclaimers.
    But on occasion my zeal in expressing my cogent arguments cause a small hiccup in my proofreading and thus we get a bit of “over the top” hyperbole that is quickly seized upon by desperate religious apologists who can’t find anything else, or sometimes the occasional random proofreader can point these out.

    Thus, I agree in small part, disagree in large part, apologize only in reference to those things which are demonstrably inaccurate or overly exaggerated, and refuse to apologize for anything else at all.
    Extreme emphasis added to this last paragraph.

    As for complaining about my words accusing (without the modifiers) all Catholic priests and nuns of criminal behavior, the irony is amazing and humourous, for that is exactly what they do to everyone in the whole world using their religious beliefs!

    Irony aside, I do not want to commit any similar error, even in appearance, but as I did not enumerate any specific crimes there is no way to either prove me wrong or right and the screeching of the “wounded” should be ignored.

    Fact: the Catholic Church is a criminal organization that is also a religious organization.

    Fact: I consider forced indoctrination to be a crime.

    Fact: The Catholic belief system is sadistic, psychopathic, and uses brainwashing to spread schizophrenia and oppression and torture and all the rest of it.

    Thus, anyone who commits the crime of forced indoctrination, anyone who commits any other crime, and anyone who fosters such acts or supports them or defends them, is an accessory to these crimes.
    This can also include those who are mentally ill to such an extent that they would be found not guilty by reason of insanity in court, or who have been so brainwashed that they did not intend violating the rights of others or harming them in any way, yet did so.

    It’s not hard to be a patsy for a con-job if you don’t have any defense against it.
    The problem is the damage that is done. I could care less about putting people in prison if we could just make the damage stop forever, since it would have the same effect, but in my opinion that is not likely to be the case at any time in the forseeable future. Too many variables and not enough people who are free of this religious madness to make it likely.

    So a nun might be innocent enough of knowingly being an accessory, but what of their sadistic religion that they have devoted their whole lives to following?
    Is it so certain that they would never harm another person in some way when they are effectively insane under the throes of a sadistic mind-program? No.
    I expect many who become nuns do so out of desperation, seeing the convent as their last hope, last refuge, last choice in lifestyle due to some personal event or emotional stress.
    In such a case, the religion becomes the puppet-master and can blind the eyes to clear indications of criminal activity.
    Or they may become willingly ignorant or deliberately averse to facing or thinking about some indication of criminal activity, all due to their personal situation, their level of schizophreniza, and such other factors as may obtain in such a case.

    Okay, going to stop blathering on now. I could type this stuff all day quite easily. I have demonstrable facts on my side, a willingness to admit that there may be exceptions to many scenarios, and plenty of reasoning ability to draw my conclusions.

    The problem becomes one of clarity of expression. That’s one of the reasons I go on for so long, writing a novel where others prefer quips and such. Sometimes I can be quite pithy, but not today. Lots of clarifications needed today, tomorrow, and every other day. I’m going to be damnably mouldy a thousand years hence. Is it not meet that I express something to help others while I may as best I can?

    But, no, let’s jump on old Jack. Let’s ignore the realities and go jump in the shallow end of the pool. Yes, that will show him he can’t talk about Catholics that way!

  2. Broga says:

    @Equality Jack: You have no problems with me, Jack. I like you posts. Probably because I agree with so much of what you write. OK, so you run a bit. So what? To write briefly and well is a difficult and time consuming art. As Oscar Wilde wrote once at the end of a long letter, “I’m sorry this is such a long letter. I didn’t have time to write a short one.”

    Keep ’em coming, Jack.

  3. I agree with you Jack, to me those defending the catholic, or any church, certainly are like being a member of the BNP (british nationalist party) here in the UK, or a KKK group… And claim not to be racist. They are in support of something that violates the minds of not only young children, but causes immeasurable suffering by the suppression of human nature, and usually by those who with to partake more than others of various sexual acts, ie homosexuality. I agree totally that indoctrination should be a crime punishable along side that of rape. It is mind rape, and a similar effect it has: Life long change in personality, ability to rationally reason and find perspective with logic that, without the rape, would have been present.

    Damn anyone who doesn’t like your tone, they probably don’t grasp your rather excellent use of the English language.

  4. Broga says:

    @Christalogical/Equality Jack. You see, Jack. You have a bit of a fan club here.

    Regarding nuns, I read somewhere but can’t remember where, that research done on the background of a group of nuns found that many of them had been abused as children. How can one not feel sorry, at least for the kindly one’s, of these sad women? Trained to venerate women hating priests, forced to deny their natural sexual needs, excluded from motherhood and family life and driven into a pantomime of passivity when, as we have seen from the behaviour of some, they repress a rage of emotions. And given certain circumstances, e.g. the Irish Laundry scandal, these burst through and the women vent their fury on innocent children.

    I wonder how many really want out but continue to be emotionally bludgeoned into acceptance by a domineering priesthood.

  5. Equality Jack says:

    Thank you, Broga. I don’t often get positive comments because so many, me included, often skim past the “tl;dr” posts.
    When I encounter religious apologists in the wild, I hate what they do with lots of passion. Matt is, in my opinion, a Catholic apologist. I’ve met lots of others on other sites.
    But he is different in that he tries so hard to talk like an atheist, yet his whole aim is clearly to be a religious apologist.
    Some will leap to point at his many atheistic posts, yet my experiences with apologetics is old hat now.
    I feel confident that were we to examine the fellow’s actual beliefs and not what he throws up as a red herring, he would be unmasked for all to see. I hate having to parse what other people say. Give me an honest conversation and I’m much more happy with it than trying to point out the many hidden lies and such. Ah, damn. Out of time. ttfn and thanks again.

  6. Equality Jack says:

    Oops! Thank you Christalogical, too! I posted late without refreshing the page. I can’t hardly type now. gottago

  7. Juvenal says:

    Equality Jack

    I to enjoy your posts & agree with your assessment of Matt.
    Apologists for religion show their true intent when they dismiss the testimony of the abused as “anecdote”.

  8. Equality Jack says:

    @Juvenal – Thank you, but I am wondering if Matt is just one of those people who is just missing a tiny but key point here and there while being an actual atheist or summat.
    It would be me who is trying to correct my fellow atheists and anyone who would talk like one. It’s like having Tourette’s.
    I feel myself to be one of the Overseers™ of the atheist community and if this makes be an arse-knuckle than I will try to “correct” people a little less like a cranky old man and more like a reasonable sort of fellow.
    But, yes, we could dig around in Matt’s psyche to find where he has fallen off the path of wisdom, but I can’t be arsed at the moment. I’d rather do a few other things. But you could poke him a bit and I’d enjoy seeing what he brings as justification for such a tactic. Yes, I would.

  9. Daz says:


    You’ve mentioned yourself that you tend to go off half-cocked. Might I suggest that you’d do well to stop throwing casual accusations of mental disability around as insults?

    Try correcting your own behaviour before sniping at others. Matt is and has been a valuable contributor to the comments on this site, whereas your own contribution—over the last few days at least—seems more along the lines of being deliberately inflammatory.

    If you disagree with Matt’s, or anyone else’s posts, fine, but it would make for a more comfortable environment if you’d debate the ideas with a little more precision, instead of firing random, and ableist, insults around at random.

    As for your self-appointed position of overseer… Self-aggrandising much? Grow up.

  10. barriejohn says:

    Ignore it, Daz. We’re going to become a laughing stock at this rate!

  11. Daz says:


    Point taken.

    I felt I had to say summat, but now I’ve said it I do indeed intend to ignore it.

  12. Equality Jack says:


  13. Rose says:


    Fact: Some of your facts aren’t facts.

    Fact: the Catholic Church is a criminal organization that is also a religious organization. Nope. Not a fact.

    Fact: I consider forced indoctrination to be a crime. Sure, that can be a fact.

    Fact: The Catholic belief system is sadistic, psychopathic, and uses brainwashing to spread schizophrenia and oppression and torture and all the rest of it. Nope, not a fact. Dead giveaway: “and all the rest of it.”

    Come on now, I’m not even Catholic OR Christian and I can see you’re just pouting and writing things in a hissy fit.

    Fact: Discussions should involve ACTUAL facts.

    Also, very shitty picture of the Pope. But that figures, it’s an article against his group.