Sister Teresa Forcades: Europe's most radical nun?

'Teresa Forcades understands feminism as a form of liberation theology. She believes, in accordance with the church's official position,that a fetus has a right to life, but she also believes that a pregnant woman has a right to self-determination that is equally absolute. In that sense she has publicly supported the right to choose abortion and the distribution of the morning-after pill. Official Vatican has criticised her activism and in 2009 Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life requested from Forcades to publicly express her commitment to the doctrinal principles of the Church, which she did.[2]
She has openly criticised the Catholic church as "misogynist and patriarchal in its structure".[1]'




http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-24079227

 

Just another example of corrupted formation in the faith. You can be right on 99% of your thinking and wrong only on one Church doctrine and loose your soul. To many nuns and priests have left the reservation and need our prayers.

 

Padraig what is really your question?

If she's "radical" (which is not by itself a pejorative term as it originally meant clearing away the rubbish and humbug and getting down to essentials) in the sense that "conservative's" use that word then why give her a pulpit here!
It seems you have a small intuition that she has at least something to offer? if so what do you think that is?

My own opinion would be that she, like many of the naturally endowed "giants" of Catholic history, is coming into the full realisation of her very great God-given gifts and limitations are being tested on both sides. Personal and institutional limitations are inevitable in this world, but that does not mean they are all of them right for new times. What those limitations are and whether they can change to cope remains to be seen. Charity and compassion are needed by all involved and judgements should be slow in coming. That is exactly what her own conventual community (and the Magisterium) seems to be doing. That's my view for what it is worth.

I have been to her Convent site (though I have never heard of her until now) up the mountain there in Montserrat an hour or so from Barcelona. A truly beautiful and spiritual place where the Virgin is alleged to have appeared in a hard to get to spot on the upper mountain side. There is a chapel sticking out over the abyss as it were there. The mountain path to it has a wonderful set of the Rosary Mysteries. I particularly liked the Visitation Statue as attached. The emotion evoked is wonderful.






It feels even more spiritual than Garabandal, of course it is much older and the huge number of pilgrims and the fabulously beautiful chapel to Our Lady upstairs of the main Church may well be the cause of that. I still remember the feeling while "wasting time" with Jesus in that chapel.

 

Forgive the interruption here but this lady is putting her own views above that of the Magisterium. This is VERY common among the bishops, priests and religious today as it has been for decades but most of those decrying truths held since the birth of the Church don't have much individual influence. This nun has clearly gained some fame and acclaim for her heterodox views. She is charming, is robed like a nun (unusual these days), well educated, erudite and persuasive. What a pity all those skills and characteristics are not employed in explaining that the Church's dogmatic teachings are unchanging and unchangeable. So much energy, treasure and skill is used to undermine the Church by its own. It is tragic.
Spain is a particularly fertile place for this nun's views. I have several Spanish friends who, while all claiming to be Catholic, do not accept the Real Presence, the need to go to Mass each Sunday, the value of celibacy and most other Catholic fundamentals. I predict that she will become even more famous and influential but don't regard this as a good thing at all. The world will love her and, in these days, that is not a good sign at all.

 

A lovely building on a lovely site Blue. No doubt about it.

A brilliant, charismatic, articulate, very popular and able person. No doubt about that either.

She endorses the murder of unborn babies through the use of the , 'Morning after' pill and generally publically has put forward the view that women are entitled to murder their babies if they want as it is their bodies and their babies.

I do have a problem with that.

I am interested, as a Catholic, what is your view on the killing of the unborn?

Also what is you view of a Catholic nun who puts forward such views ?

Give that in 1995 Pope John Paul II declared that the Church’s teaching on abortion "is unchanged and unchangeable. Therefore, by the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter and his successors . . . I declare that direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, always constitutes a grave moral disorder, since it is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. This doctrine is based upon the natural law and upon the written word of God, is transmitted by the Church’s tradition and taught by the ordinary and universal magisterium. No circumstance, no purpose, no law whatsoever can ever make licit an act which is intrinsically illicit, since it is contrary to the law of God which is written in every human heart, knowable by reason itself, and proclaimed by the Church" (Evangelium Vitae 62).

 

Padraig maybe I missed something... I didn't see anything in the above that clearly states she disagrees with the Church's teaching on abortion. In fact I thought you said the opposite, "She believes, in accordance with the church's official position,that a fetus has a right to life" and also "...requested from Forcades to publicly express her commitment to the doctrinal principles of the Church, which she did."

Perhaps you have access to direct statements from her that clearly deny these ones? If so I would be interested in the links if you have them. Otherwise I am prepared to give her the benefit of the doubt as any Christian should given how easy it is for the media to misrepresent and sensationalise carefully framed views of public figures. Her video where she spoke her own words did not seem to say anything that would lead me to believe she disagrees with the Church's teaching wrt abortion.

We must also keep in mind that political views are not always the same as moral ones.
Even Augustine and Aquinas sadly accepted that temporal powers may need to enact laws that allow citizens the "freedom" to choose such evils (eg prostitution) for the sake of the good functioning of civil society as a whole in a broken world (as did Moses).

From the material you have provided above that is all I see her saying. Whether a Nun should be getting involved in such political matters is of course a good question. But opining that she is disagreeing with Church teaching seems a bridge too far given the material supplied above. But perhaps I missed something.

 

Yes; perhaps you missed the bit that said "she has publicly supported the right to choose abortion and the distribution of the morning-after pill"? If that doesn't clearly state that she disagrees with the Church's stance on abortion, then I don't know what does.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teresa_Forcades

 

I am not opposed to the selling of contraceptives in Pharmacies. Would you infer from this that I oppose Catholic Contraceptive teaching? If I was a politican and a Catholic lobby group pushed for introduction of Canon Law in my country I would oppose it just as vehemently as I would Muslim pressure groups desirous of introducing Shariah.

The days of non-mobile populations, segregated religious countries and homogenous ethnic groups living in city-states or isolated mountain regions has passed. Societies now have to learn to live together and tolerate differences of belief and morality outside of the Catholic Church in a way unheard of in past times. Catholic politicians would seem wise to avoid imposing Canon Law on large sectors of society who do not believe in much of it. To do so would make such politicans little different from their fundamentalist Muslim counterparts who push for political recognition of their own equivalent of Canon Law (Shariah).

For reasons I do not understand you seem willing to interpret a terribly brief and ambiguous 3rd party report as equivalent to "this Nun clearly rejects the Church's teaching on Abortion." Yet when the same third party also reports that she publicly affirms Church Doctrine on the matter you do not accept this - and presumably consider her a liar.

I put it to you that a fair observer (let a lone a Christian one) would first seek out if there is a misrepresentation taking place by the third party, or perhaps one has not understood the full nuances of the situation and that in fact both statements can be reconciled..

I am attempting to suggest that the latter is the case here in the quotes provided by padraig above.
Politics and ethics are two intersecting but different spheres of human activity. I humbly suggest you may be mistaken if you believe that Catholics must hold that these two spheres should always and everywhere intersect perfectly - as indeed would a Shariah Muslim or a Knight Templar of medieval times have mistakenly believed.

I have indicated above that the greatest teachers in the Catholic Church have never held to such an extreme position. Christian politicans, for the good of a mixed society, may well need to allow laws that "support" evils we Christians personally would never do or want to be done by our own community.

I have not seen anything yet from this Nun that would cause me to think she is saying any more than that.
She clearly, at least, opposes Christian politicans pushing some Church Teaching into civil law. It is not, by that reason alone, a sin to do so. It may be a sin for a Nun to be so politically active. And indeed, I note that the Church, in the Wiki article above, is concerned at this stage with her political activism and not her doctrinal beliefs.

 

Blue Horizon

I do not agre with your post. The nun and your are not right I think. If we go down the line of saying that we have to accept all human differnces, then we should be accepting of all immoral behaviour no matter what like gay marriage, child brides and all that. We as Christians can disagree with it, but we must accept that others do not and make sure that we accomodate them. If we don't agree to do that we are fundamentalists.

I have seen that attitude here in Ireland and to be honest it is something that I find very distressing. I think it has led to all sort of problems. The nun cannot say on the one hand I dont believe in abortion but I believe in theright of others to have abortions....that is not teaching the truth but running away from it. If abortion is wrong then she has to say it is wrong for everybody even people who do not see it as wrong. Its called standing up for right or God's law.

 

FoundSoul I do understand your position (and your distress) as it was once my own. Unfortunately, intuitive as it may seem for those of us of Irish descent (I include myself), Universal Church Tradition is really counter intuitive on this point. For the Irish in Ireland especially there are very understandable historical reasons why the felt relationship between Church and State is experiencedy very differently by Catholics than is the case in, say, other younger nations such as Australia and New Zealand where populations are extremely secular, mixed and diverse in terms of both ethnicity and religion.

If you go into the matter at a doctrinal/historical level you will find this is one of a number of Catholic issues that few of us lay people really understand fully or correctly because it is not something I was ever taught from a pulpit.

You may or may not find the following link helpful. It is in fact quite tame on the topic and is exactly what I was taught by Catholic Professors (Dominican priests trained in Rome) over 30 years ago. Article here.

I respect your position, it is in fact the position of 95% of us laity. I don't really want to take this any further as it is a distressing topic. Debate under such conditions makes for entrenched positions which miliate against the time and reflection and prayer that disputes such as these always require of truth seekers.

Yes I agree we have to provide an example and a witness of true morality - but always through State law in every case of grave sin ... Aquinas and Augustine would disagree. Yes it may be appropriate in Ireland but in other countries with different religious/ethnic/secular mixes it may not.

 

The, 'Morning after Pill' is not a, 'contraceptive', it is an abortafacient.


http://www.thefreedictionary.com/abortifacient


a·bor·ti·fa·cient (-bôrt-fshnt)
adj.
Causing abortion.
n.
A substance or device used to induce abortion.
Contraception is another issue. I do not wish to confuse the too. Any , 'Catholic' who supports abortion is in my opinion anaethma, automatically excommunicated. Any Doctor who procures abortion for their patients or supports such practices, nun or not is heading for hell in a sports car. Worse by her teaching and example is leading many other souls to hell as well.
This is not nit picking. As the Catholic Cathechism indicates, I am talking about murder.

CHAPTER TWO
"YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF"
ARTICLE 5
THE FIFTH COMMANDMENT

You shall not kill.54
You have heard that it was said to the men of old, "You shall not kill: and whoever kills shall be liable to judgment." But I say to you that every one who is angry with his brother shall be liable to judgment.55
2258 "Human life is sacred because from its beginning it involves the creative action of God and it remains for ever in a special relationship with the Creator, who is its sole end. God alone is the Lord of life from its beginning until its end: no one can under any circumstance claim for himself the right directly to destroy an innocent human being."56

 

Idon't understand your post BH. I just don't see how you can say that the Nun is right in what she says that being against abortion is OK for her (she believes that it is murder, I presume) but that she must also accept that others do not believe it is murder and she must defend their right to have abortions because of this. That is hypocrisy. If abortion is murder then she is duty bound to say no one has the right to commit it. If she does not say that she is committing a grevious sin in allowing others to commit such a sin and not warn them that they are doing so.

If I am clear here, its a miracle but I think Padraig was right to question of this Nun is a radical. I think thye Church is full of such religious like this Nun.

 

B H said...Yes I agree we have to provide an example and a witness of true morality - but always through State law in every case of grave sin ... Aquinas and Augustine would disagree.

Aquinas and Augustine would TOLERATE evil to a limit [eg harlots] , but do you really think as far as the morning after pill?
This nun will never be a 'Giant' BH, unless you mean GIANT DISASTER.
Do any 'Church Giants' support her views on women priests, Bishops, Pope?Church teachings do not evolve.

 

Good question BH. I was listening to a talk just this past weekend, www.therealpresence.org, where Father John Hardon was asked the same question from a pharmacist. "What should I do, because our Church opposes contraceptives"? Father Hardon told him that he should find another line of work as soon as possible. This person heeded his words and quit being a pharmacist. You can not do something evil (distribute immoral drugs) and be in good conscience as a Catholic.

 

Sr Teresa has been in the news lately, she is a prominent figure and her views are very public. The article below which appeared in the last few days clearly lays out her 10-point programme and what she is very publicly calling for. No ambiguity here and this is not mere third party speculation.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-24079227

This has nothing whatsoever to do with contraception. Your response completely side-steps the main issue here: this is a Catholic nun giving not just her support for, but clearly and publicly advocating for, the "right" to abortion. What aspect of this do you not object to? Christ said if you are not for me, you are against me. So which is she? I don't know that I consider her a liar, but I certainly consider her a hypocrite, if she claims to support Catholic doctrine on the one hand and then publicly advocates for something that is in complete contradiction to Catholic doctrine on the other.

 

Evil masks itself in so many ways. The devil is so cunning. He is so subtle in how he baits his catch. It only takes a tiny little bit of heresy to hook you.

 

That's exactly what I wanted to say. Thank you Adoremus.

 

Heresy is the bane of my life. I think sometimes it was put on this earth just to annoy me. I think it is awful just how many religious are saying heresy is all right though. People listen to them because of who they are.

 

Sorry, but I just have to add a quote from the article I linked to above:

"As long as my religious life is full of love, I'll be here," she tells me. "But the moment this life turns sacrificial…Then it's my duty to abandon it."

Now, what would have happened if Jesus had said of his ministry "the moment this life turns sacrificial then it's my duty to abandon it"?

I shudder at the thought of the damage this woman is doing and all those whom she is leading astray. She has a massive following and is very influential... ugh.