I got a couple of e-mails earlier from readers who took issue with the story I posted from the Los Angeles Times, about the Sisters of Bethany being evicted to help the Archdiocese of Los Angeles pay its massive sex abuse settlement.

One reader made some sound points:

First of all, the sister who claims to feel like one of the sexual abuse victims needs to get a check up from the neck up. She needs to retract that statement right away. How can she compare what is happening to her and the other nuns to be on the same level of a child that was sexually assaulted. I’m sure there will be one or two adult victims that will take offense to her statement.

Second, what about her vows? No one ever promised her a permanent residence in Santa Barbara, no less a particular convent. The bishop of her diocese has made a decision – abide by it. The media is not the place to air her dissatisfaction with the bishop or the church. The comments made by her and the other sisters are outrageous.

The last part of my argument is simple economics – three nuns living in a house valued at close to one million dollars is not cost effective. Two of the nuns are retired and do volunteer work in the local community and the third acts as the housekeeper/cook and does some work at the church next door. If I could sell a million dollar property and move the nuns into a smaller less expensive residence I would do it too….

I think it is time to start to merge some of these orders together – reduce waste and cut administrative cost/expenses. Open larger retirement homes that will provide the proper care for our aging religious…I’m sure a good business manager could develop a real retirement community for our religious. The first step would be to do away with the red tape caused by the various orders, each seeking to retain power.

The second reader wrote to say he believes the story is being mis-reported and mis-represented:

Like so many stories in the media, your front-line story today about the Sisters of Bethany does not portray the reality “as it really is.”

Due to speaking to a dear friend – religious sister in Los Angeles – I know the facts. As a matter of fact, sister speaks of losing “their house” In fact, it is owned by the Archdiocese. Another fact is that due to the generosity of the local pastor – they (Sisters of Bethany) have had many many years of in fact, FREE RENT…something many other orders DO NOT HAVE !…

All the sisters of the Archdiocese often pay rent for appropriations they use of the Archdiocese’s. (as do others!) This is common and just the way ecclesial bodies handle such things. It is the norm. (e.g. suppose the Jesuits want to open a new school – if they do not purchase the land and build the building themselves, the normal course, and instead use a diocesan facility they would naturally pay ‘rent’ or ‘lease’ to the diocese by contract.)

In fact, the Sisters of Bethany have benefited enormously from the past arrangement for quite a number of years. There have been many instances in the past, where sisters (or other groups) are utilizing a convent or facility – and because of a change of pastoral priorities, etc., have found themselves having to make due with different accomodations and move. They have done so without “making a stink” and bringing bad publicity to the church, as have the Sisters of Bethany…very bad form indeed.

So, no, they are not the “poor victims” they make themselves out to be. I do not, however find the situation laudatory in terms of having to sell assets to bail out the Archdiocese in order to pay restitution – but that is a separate matter.

Again, good points.

But I still feel bad for the sisters, women who live a particularly austere life and who are being forced into this unpleasant set of cirumstances by the reprehensible actions of priests.

They are, in a real sense, paying for someone else’s sins.

UPDATE: I see there’s a lively exchange of ideas and opinions on this also happening over Amy Welborn’s blog. For those interested, drop by this link for more.