Can a Religious be a social reformer?

[Alison]

Okay, let me explain. So let’s take the Civil Rights movement for example. If that was going on now, would a Sister/Brother/etc. be able to lead such a movement? I know this may sound like an odd question, but I feel called to religious life, yet I am also strongly desirous of being a social reformer. I guess I’m just wondering if it would be too "out of their sphere", as this isn’t inner-Church problems we are speaking of, but societal ones. I don’t know how much Religious can be involved in things like politics, philosophical debates, etc. 

Just now, Alison said:

Okay, let me explain. So let’s take the Civil Rights movement for example. If that was going on now, would a Sister/Brother/etc. be able to lead such a movement? I know this may sound like an odd question, but I feel called to religious life, yet I am also strongly desirous of being a social reformer. I guess I’m just wondering if it would be too "out of their sphere", as this isn’t inner-Church problems we are speaking of, but societal ones. I don’t know how much Religious can be involved in things like politics, philosophical debates, etc. 

Or even like be closely involved with it if not actually being the one to start and lead it. 

[Luigi]

Many priests, sisters, and brothers were actively involved in the Civil Rights movement. Many religious congregations today are at least as social-reform oriented as they are religious. It varies by congregation, but I don't see any problem here at all. 

[Lou]

I listened to a podcast a while ago about a priest in New York who leads a small social reform through sport 

It's not exactly a social movement, but it's significant. I think films like Dead Man Walking sort of touch on this. 

I guess what sort of strikes me about this is that the vocation to RL has to come first. You could feel passionately about a movement and it could be ruled out by your Superiors or you could be working on something and be missioned elsewhere. The commitment has to be first to God, your Superior, your community and congregation and then comes the 'accidentals' so to speak. I know you've probably thought of this but just wanted to add it.

In Fr Mark's case (this is a rowing show- not a religious one, so if you listen to it you'll be wading through a lot of sport/hardman chatter as well as the spiritual gems) he expected to be a Diocesan priest and was content to leave everything else. What happened him then, was unexpected... to be a teacher... and a coach and basically pull children from poverty.

 

[freedomreigns]

A great deal of political involvement in particular belongs to the laity. It's very much an "in the world but not of the world" kind of thing, not that religious can't or don't sometimes express that kind of leaning, but it can actually be a bit of a scandal at times if it's overly emphasized. It isn't the main point of the religious life. I agree with the above thoughts as well, that the call has to be to the consecration, community, religious life primarily. Perhaps in the unfolding of a vocation there is a place for things like philisophical debates, but the majority of religious vocations, especailly for women, don't tend to lead that way.  And it would be an unfolding in any case. That is the interesting part of religious life as it exists, actually as life really, but moreso in religious life. We don't always get to "choose our own adventure."  

Edited May 27, 2023 by freedomreigns

[Nunsuch]

So much of the history of religious life--especially for women--is the history of reform! They were reformers in civil rights, in social work, in labor, in women's rights, in educational reform.... The first woman in the parliament of Hungary was a sister. Women religious were among the righteous who fought Nazis and protected Jews during World War II. I could go on and on. So see this as outside the scope of religious life, especially those who are in ministerial communities, is to misunderstand the history of sisters, especially. 

[freedomreigns]

Nunsuch, interesting.  There are definitely communities that have a "social justice" kind of focus now that you mention it. I hadn't thought of it.  I do still think that really partisan political involvement on the part of religious or priests can be really scandalous. (I could name names so to speak, but I don't think that would be helpful.)

[Nunsuch]

28 minutes ago, freedomreigns said:

Nunsuch, interesting.  There are definitely communities that have a "social justice" kind of focus now that you mention it. I hadn't thought of it.  I do still think that really partisan political involvement on the part of religious or priests can be really scandalous. (I could name names so to speak, but I don't think that would be helpful.)

That isn't what I'm talking about--though you can see that on both the left and right. But the history of women (especially) religious is filled with reformers of all sorts. 

[Lea]

On 5/27/2023 at 8:06 PM, Alison said:

 

Or even like be closely involved with it if not actually being the one to start and lead it. 

Solid resounding yes!

You might think of Ruth Pfau, who was not exactly leading a civil rights movement but build up the health system in Pakistan when no one else could have done so and ended up as an health advisor/ secretary of state to the government there. 
Nowadays, the IBVM for example even has an office a the UN in New York, and a few Brothers (mainly Jesuits, proudly putting the SJ in SJW) spring to mind adressing social and ecological justice, fighting against abortions or the death penalty, to name just few issues. I once was told by a CJ sister that whenever a sister has a political charism it should be used, because God has called them on purpose.  

[DisplayNameBlock]

There was an obituary in the Times (gift link below) of a sister who took on giant corporations to encourage them to act more environmentally responsible (among other things) fairly recently.  

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/23/business/sister-patricia-daly-dead.html?unlocked_article_code=9EHJ4InCKsRKyEJ9MoXtCcfHd6jwcpz-6tbASX01lYt5uroC6vsrkKf4jwes8FuOekdMXOb9fITfADMwhoXsivNDRMwSDA_NwEb-X0DcJqg0C-_XdUiahy5wwqEB8Zz_XVPEjlOMEf311tlKDASSwDWqbKLuGD5det47OXWyXm07dtVXOk0kaauHmpwfkE9zetE0zB2sYltBw_QltUpmfXD6-QazMgfSnu-Dv49dHtwSf32xzYZGAoRTvqt8_lmf-YL45CAT8R4c5HjEWOQrJo0VOtqBOnCAKe1j-cpTwQ90i_z8R48Hc4Amcup_JI_M67nEVKtI6sAJP9mQ0bRJX_KvjEc&smid=url-share

[fides' Jack]

On 5/27/2023 at 12:06 PM, Alison said:

I know this may sound like an odd question, but I feel called to religious life, yet I am also strongly desirous of being a social reformer. I guess I’m just wondering if it would be too "out of their sphere", as this isn’t inner-Church problems we are speaking of, but societal ones. I don’t know how much Religious can be involved in things like politics, philosophical debates, etc. 

It's true that religious have always been reformers, but historically only as it pertains to the spiritual good.  They may take sides in a war, but really only to the extent they believe that God wills a certain outcome.  They may advocate for the poor to be fed, but because it is a corporal work of mercy; the poor are images of God's likeness.  The biggest societal problems are, in my mind, spiritual battles.  It's not so much that religious who speak on these things are trying to be social reformers, but that they are trying to spread the Word of God.

[Nunsuch]

3 hours ago, fides' Jack said:

It's true that religious have always been reformers, but historically only as it pertains to the spiritual good.  They may take sides in a war, but really only to the extent they believe that God wills a certain outcome.  They may advocate for the poor to be fed, but because it is a corporal work of mercy; the poor are images of God's likeness.  The biggest societal problems are, in my mind, spiritual battles.  It's not so much that religious who speak on these things are trying to be social reformers, but that they are trying to spread the Word of God.

Actually, they almost never "take sides" in a war. During the US Civil War, for instance, sisters nursed the injured from both the north and the south. There are several books on this, some of them available free online--and see the "Nuns of the Battlefield" monument in DC. And I think some of what you say here draws a distinction without a difference. Although sisters' activism started long before the 1890s, certainly the social justice dimensions of encyclicals like Rerum Novarum justified activism. Causes like racial justice, rights for immigrants, labor, etc., have long been the focus of what sisters  (and some male religious, too, of course). 

[fides' Jack]

5 hours ago, Nunsuch said:

Actually, they almost never "take sides" in a war.

I agree.  I was actually thinking of a case in France older than the civil war.  So it does happen.

 

[Norseman82]

There was a recent Pope who would be considered a "social reformer" where he came from.  Also look up Fr. Jerzy Popieluszko.  

Edited June 10, 2023 by Norseman82

[BarbTherese]

Thank you