Among the items in Signs of the Times on Aug. 4 is a notice that the Vatican says flexibility allowed on posture after Communion, even though the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, No. 43, states that all are to remain standing until the end of Mass. The reason given for this statement by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments is worth noting and should be observed as a principle regarding other postures at Mass, such as standing for the eucharistic prayer: The mind of the prescription of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, No. 43, is intended, on the one hand, to ensure within broad limits a certain uniformity of posture with the congregation for the various parts of the celebration of Holy Mass, and on the other, to not regulate posture rigidly....
That explanation is in accord with the much-ignored principle of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, No. 37, which insists that even in the sacred liturgy the Church does not wish to impose a rigid uniformity in matters which do not involve the faith or the good of the whole community.
Charles E. Miller, C.M.
Patricia McCann, R.S.M., has provided an excellent, sweeping overview of what has happened to religious life among women religious in the United States since the Second Vatican Council (Catholic Identity, New Age and Women Religious, 7/21). Her knowledge of history is undoubtedly what made possible her judicious synopsis of the decline of religious life, arguably one of the most confusing phenomena in the postmodern world and one that has plagued the church to the present day. Indeed, what will happen to religious life, that rich gift to the 19th- and 20th-century American Catholic Church?
Of particular interest to me is Sister McCann’s willingness to admit the degree to which New Age action and perspectives have invaded the life and thinking of so many active religious congregations today. This is an honest and correct observation, yet it is ignored as a major reason for the obvious problems within congregations and the consequent decline in religious vocations. If not accepted by religious sisters as occasioning points of confusion, it has certainly not been understood by our lay sisters and brothers.
Here is where I wish that Sister McCann had been more emphatic. She says, for example, that we were not yet ready to focus on an evaluative analysis of these changes and suggests, Now it is time for a dialogue between Catholic faith tradition and New Age thought. To my mind, it is time for dialogue to give way to action. It is time for women religious to recognize that a certain New Age secularity has taken priority, one that must be re-evaluated in terms of its consequences for the future of religious life.
In this time of diminishment and mounting secular ridicule, it is time to face the larger questions Sister McCann also poses. The first question she suggests could alone set us all on the path we need to considernamely, Is faith in God made manifest in Jesus and articulated through the Catholic Church and its theological tradition still our core reality? My hope is that the challenge Sister McCann presents in her insightful article will not be left unexamined by today’s women religious.
Dolores Liptak, R.S.M.