Given my affection for Dorothy Day, this is a hard post to write. I was always afraid that the radicalism of The Catholic Worker movement might one day target the Church in such a way that it would sever its ties. It looks like this will happen TONIGHT (September 5, 2008) at 7:30 PM. The so-called Roman Catholic (married) “Womanpriest” Janice Sevre-Duszynska, who recently attempted ordination, will offer her first invalid and illicit Mass at the Dorothy Day Catholic Worker House in Northwest Washington, DC. This dissenting priestess belongs to something called the Central Kentucky Council of Peace and Justice. The local Catholic Worker Blog states: “A former prisoner of conscience for the School of the Americas Watch, Janice’s homily will reflect on the connections between sexism and violence, and explore ‘waiting on the Spirit’ in civil and ecclesial resistance.” The event is being advertised and everyone is invited. However, good Catholics would do well to bypass this event and to find another organization in the future for their donations and volunteerism.
The NCR published a homily by the political activist and Maryknoller Father Roy Bourgeois that was given at her attempted ordination. He confused the issue of ordination with matters like racism and treated it as if it might be a social justice issue. Next he borrowed the feminist argument about our imagery of God. He writes: “As people of faith we profess that God is all powerful and the source of life. Yet, when it comes to women being ordained, it seems that opponents are saying that this same God who is all powerful and created the heavens and the earth and can bring the dead back to life, somehow, cannot empower a woman to be a priest. Suddenly, we as men believe God becomes powerless when women approach the altar to celebrate Mass”. He says nothing about feminist ridicule of the “fatherhood” of God, even though there may be something revelatory and not prejudiced or patriarchial about how God has made himself known. Of course, his comments miss the real point, that God is all powerful and that both Scripture and Sacred Tradition attest to the fact that he did not offer holy orders to women. An almighty God does not have to take his cues from militant feminists or from traitorous jailbird priests. The question has never been that God is not in charge. The crux of the dilemma is discernment of divine providence. About this our Lord’s appointed Magisterium has spoken and is definitive.
These priestesses are not humble in the face of the divine mystery or willing to accept that the true Church does not affirm or ratify any calling of a woman to priestly vocation. They want it, not as a gift, but as something they think they deserve. They do not want to serve, but crave power. Even had they been men, they would not be worthy of ordination. Fidelity in the faith is made into a shambles and obedience is dismissed.
The Archdiocese of Washington contacted members by telephone and in writing, stressing the incompatibility of the event with Catholic teaching and practice. However, they refused to cancel the event although it will probably forfeit their status as an approved Catholic organization. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (1577) and the Code of Canon Law (canon 1024) make it abundantly clear that “Only a baptized man validly receives sacred ordination. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith decreed on December 19, 2007: “…he who shall have attempted to confer holy orders on a woman, as well as the woman who may have attempted to receive Holy Orders, incurs in a latae sententiae excommunication….”
This is sad news. I would hope (or at least I prefer to think) that most if not all other Catholic Worker houses would not set themselves against the Church like this.
SARA: Before I make any comment please let me say that I’m not an advocate of women priests, only of sound argument! St John of the Cross suggests that the relationship of the human soul to God always resembles that of female to male, (whether the soul belongs to a man or to a woman!). Thus the person of God the Father is so because of our relationship soul (feminine) to Creator/beloved (masculaine.) I’ve always found that an easier way to understand why Christ refers to the ‘Father’ and to the Church as his bride, as well as why we invariably refer to God as He and Him than crashing up against the sheer illogic of our Creator as actually masculine. (Male and female proceed from God’s own nature and are in God’s own image, though one presumes there’s a lot more to that image than us!, God ’speaks’ in many feminine terms in Scripture and the book of Wisdom’ reminds us of at least one female aspect of God and so on.)
FATHER JOE: But we are not discussing simply the soul, but also the body. Men and women are not angels. Separate our souls from our bodies and we end up with ghosts and corpses. The view of the soul being feminine in the face of almighty God has to do with the notion that the feminine is receptive and passive. I doubt militant feminists would be pleased by such an appreciation and would judge it a stereotype. The Holy Office knows better than we do as individual Catholics and we can trust the judgment of the living Church under the guiding protection of the Holy Spirit. The priest is configured to Christ, even in his gender. Sexuality is not an accidental but touches the core identity of a person. The priest says at the altar, THIS IS MY BODY, THIS IS THE CUP OF MY BLOOD. While there is something indeterminant about the Mystical Body; the priestly office requires a close identification with the historical Christ. The priest is an icon for Christ. Christ is the Son of God. He is the high priest and neither Judaism nor Christianity ever knew any legitimate “female” priestesses.
SARA: So what about what Scripture and tradition have to say on women priests? The Hebrew tradition, (of which the Judaean, now known as the Jewish tradition was the predominant influence by the time of Christ), contained many directives that we now view with horror and which Our Lord ‘commuted’. They’re too obvious to list here. But scripture arose in and was written down out of that context – a tradition in need of Christ-ening.
FATHER JOE: There was nothing fiendish about the Hebrew priesthood. Animals and grain were sacrificed, but not human beings. Jesus is the high priest who also makes himself a victim for us. Our Lord was involved himself with the worship at the temple. He took the Seder and applied it to himself as the new unblemished Lamb of God.
SARA: At a time when women were accorded few of the rights and responsibilities inherent in natural justice, when slavery was considered quite normal, when non Hebrews were considered subhuman and unclean, the natural justice reflected in Our Lord’s life and teaching was revolutionary. He never says – at least in the record that we have – that slavery is wrong because human beings cannot own one another, that men are not superior to women and cannot dominate or tyrannize or subjugate women. But His Life and example say it clearly.
FATHER JOE: Actually, non-Hebrews were not considered “subhuman” it was merely a case about God’s chosen, occupation and the danger of idolatry. Jesus planted the seeds for the eventual eradication of slavery. As for women, the paganism to which Christianity would spread accounted them more rights that Judaism, and yet they reckoned that their goddesses and priestesses could have no role in the religious faith established by Jesus Christ. Jesus treated Martha and Mary like disciples and made the Samaritan woman at the well into a great prophetess. Jesus did not restrain himself to the conventions about women. Nevertheless, he made no apostles or priests among them.
SARA: Did He, or would He, institute women priests? I’m not sure I agree that He instituted any at all. He laid the *foundations* for a priesthood within a tradition and a world in which ‘priestesses’ were simply unHebrew and unthinkable. Did He intend that should change? I don’t know. Our Lord treated women as equals, ate drank and talked with the ’subhuman’ and the unclean, celebrated the innocence and simplicity of children far above the complicated self importance of adults.
FATHER JOE: If you disbelieve in the priesthood altogether, then there is no need for us to have this discussion. You are totally out of your league. If there is no priesthood then there is no sacrifice of the Mass, no real presence, and no absolution for sins. Such a stand means that the priestly ministry of Jesus ended with his death or with his ascension. It means, for Catholics, that we have been orphaned by God. It may be that you do not understand this discussion because YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT A PRIEST IS. At the Last Supper, he told his apostles, “Do this in remembrance of me.” This command institutes a new priesthood and a new oblation. As a Christian, and as a priest, I find the notion of priestesses unthinkable. It is no wonder that such attempted aberrations are often linked with new age thinking, goddess worship and the reforming of Christ as a ferminine Kristi and Our Father as “mother”.
SARA: But he didn’t leave us an exhaustive list of rules like those the prophet Mohamed wrote down. He left us His example and the Law that is written in men’s (and women’s) hearts.
FATHER JOE: He also left us with a living teaching authority or infallible Magisterium. He gave the keys to Peter and to his successors. This teaching authority, protected by the Holy Spirit, is the definitive interpreter of Scripture and Sacred Tradition. The deposit of faith is entrusted to the Pope and bishops of the Church. This is far better than a book of laws or just a Holy Book with no one to say whether it is understood correctly. Dissenters try to bypass this authority. Such is never permissable for the faithful Catholic.
SARA: He founded a Church based on his disciples – women as well as men – who went out into a world that still regarded many human beings as mere property and for whom women ‘ambassadors’ preaching and leading would have been a scandal. At least, the world in which the records were made, the Hebrew, Greek and Roman world would have been scandalized. If Miriam of Magdala really did make it to the pre-Romanized Celts of Europe she wouldn’t have had that problem.
FATHER JOE: He founded the Church on his apostles (priestly men). No one discounts the roles of men and women among the disciples, but they were not the established teaching authority or leaders of the Church. The apostles were high priests of the new dispensation. They extended their authority to the bishops who in turn ordained priests and deacons. The true ambassadors or ministers of reconciliation were the apostles or bishops (episcopoi) and priests (presbyters).
SARA: Given the mammoth convulsions caused in the early Church by the questions of circumcision of believers and what is OK for Christians to eat, (whether they were bound by what we now call the ‘Kosher’ diet), I can’t imagine the Church would have survived the attempt to abandon a male priesthood that had been in place for thousands of years. Just to paint the picture, imagine the close disciples of Mohamed trying to persuade the arab world (the same world the Hebrews belonged to), that it was time for women to lead and that women must be recognized as Imams and their word taken as law. It’s quite a picture.
FATHER JOE: Sorry, the issue of a male-only priesthood is not culturally conditioned. The Church has determined that such reflects the direct mind of Christ. We are also told by the Holy See that this question is settled. There can be no more speculation about it. It is resolved doctrine and Pope John Paul II insisted that it is immutable. If people want women priests, then they must fashion their own (without supernatural assistance or warrant) and separate themeselves from Catholic unity. That is why those who attempt women’s ordination commit mortal sin and are automatically excommunicated from the true Church.
SARA: The context I’d like to see this debate take place in is one that is respectful of the circumstances in which Our Lord and Christianity were born – as respectful as He was Himself. Without context, there is no true discussion.
FATHER JOE: There is no real debate. This is now a problem of ecumenism and what to do with those denominations which claim female clergy. The Womenpriests movement, while calling itself Roman Catholic, is Protestant. The Catholic Church has definitively resolved the issue. The problem remains those dissenters who refuse to acknowledge Catholic teaching while refusing to manifest their breach.
SARA: Slavery, mutilation and blood law must have hurt Him to see. Yet he railed against none of them. He caused no offence. He spoke of non judgment, of being without blame before you cast the first stone to kill, taking the log from your own eye before you try to get the splinter out of your brother’s. He spoke of rendering to Caesar that which is Caesar’s. He does not seem to have spoken against the practice of sequestering women away from the ‘main’ part of the Temple even though he could have shouted to the rooftops, and with absolute truth, that His own mother was the greatest living human being on the earth and the Temple was made for her.
FATHER JOE: What about St. Paul? He certainly “railed” about a number of issues and his words are God’s inspired revelation to men. As for Mary, she was the greatest human being ever to live, besides her Son, our Lord. However, Mary was never a priest. Priesthood is a gift. God gives it to whom he wills. He chose to give it only to men. Case closed. There is no social justice issue here. No one can merit holy orders.
SARA: Time and His example, his Presence in our world, have done that for Him, have changed us so that our vision of what the world should be is a little more like His – at least in some places. We abhor slavery, torture, public executions, child abuse (with the horrific exception of abortion). We fight for the natural law that says race makes a person neither more nor less than any other and that men and women enjoy the same natural rights and are entitled to the same respect. In today’s church, Our Lady has her rightful place. And women are not kept from the center of the Church and the True Presence as if they were unclean. On the contrary women are theologians and leaders in all kinds of ways.
FATHER JOE: Women have an equal grace with men in terms of baptism and discipleship. However, this does not mean they are called to priesthood. I know a number of wonderful and faithful women theologians who would insist that women cannot be priests. Most of those who speculate otherwise, are dissenters on many other issues and do not think with the mind of the Church. They might have big degrees, but they are poor Catholic theologians or not Catholic at all. They might know academia and religion, but a true theologian must see him or herself as a humble servant of the Magisterium, accepting all that the Catholic Church holds to be true. I am absolutely convinced that there is no such creature as a woman priest in the Church founded by Jesus Christ.
SARA: All that would have been beyond imagining in the world into which Our Lord was born. But then that was one of the reason’s why he WAS born then and there, wouldn’t you think? Since it is clear to this follower of Christ, (who happens to be head over heels in love with Him), that without Him the world I know, as bad as it is undoubtedly is, would be unbearable. I don’t have to rely on my faith and belief for that part – I can look at the way his Life and example and teaching have changed the world from the one into which He incarnated to the one in which we now live.
FATHER JOE: The very reason for a living teaching (and governing) authority is to give the Christian community some elasticity and ability to deal with future questions. The same Magisterium which condemned slavery, today condemns abortion for the same basic reasons. The Eucharist is at the heart of the Catholic faith. Nothing can be done to risk this sacred mystery.
SARA: Does He want Christendom to keep changing and growing so as to resemble His kingdom more and more? No doubt. Even if we’re now at the end of times. And does that continued change and growth towards true humanity require women priests? I seriously doubt it. But not because Scripture and tradition don’t point to that being ‘allowed’.
FATHER JOE: Christianity can be perverted. Catholicism upholds many teachings against a storm of protest from modernity. Many Christian denominations have lost their soul. They tolerate abortion, cohabitation, homosexuality, preach a prosperity gospel that demonizes the poor, etc. You know you are in trouble when a large Christian “church” holds a convention and the only moral issue that members can agree upon is opposition to landmines. Women priests would sever apostolic succession, if it had not previously been lost as in other ecclesial communities.
SARA: I have a sense of horror about the notion of women as priests – but I’m not sure enough of my understanding to give my reasoning here. If you have other theological arguments against opening the priesthood to women I’d be grateful for a more solid basis to stand on myself!
FATHER JOE: Go to this link and you will find a number of topics discussed…
http://fatherjoe.wordpress.com/instructions/eucharist/priestesses/
Gutierrez: Why There Will Be Women Priests
Gutierrez: Ecumenical Perspective on Women Priests
Gutierrez: Abortion & Women’s Ordination
Gutierrez: Open Letter to the Pope
Gutierrez: Second Letter to the Pope
Miss Wannabe’s Points of Protest
1. Sexism or Truth?
2. Maleness Matters
3. Confusing Initiation with Vocation
4. Eucharist & Priesthood: Different Modes of Presence
5. No Conflict Between the Will of Christ & of the Church
6. Church Authority Under the Hand of God
7. False Relationship Between Gospel of Life Issues & Vocations
8. Theological Authorities
9. Points of Correction
10. Marriage Imagery & the Priestly Groom
11. The Truth Vs. Historical Revisionism
12. As a Logical First Step: Why No Mention of Deaconesses?
13. Declaration on the Question of the Admission of Women to Ministerial Priesthood
14. Words from St. Chrysostom
15. Bishop Untener’s Views
16. Tradition Can Be Trusted
17. Error Has No Rights
18. What Kind of Music in a Catholic Symphony?
19. A Role for the Scriptures or Cultural Stereotypes?
20. Rebellion Against the Church
21. Inadequacy of the Male?
22. Vocation is Pure Gift
23. Another Christ
24. Distorted Scriptures
25. Three False Understandings
26. Fr. Hauke’s Masterful Work: Women in the Priesthood?
27. Assorted Responses
28. Responses to Criticisms of Fr. Hauke’s Work
29. Early Christianity Elevated Women’s Dignity Outside of Priesthood
30. C. S. Lewis: A Modern Apologist Rejects Priesthood for Women as Impossible
31. Seduction of Radical Feminists: No Basis for Certitude
32. Priest or Priestess
33. Rejection of a Flawed Interpretation of Galatians
34. Discarding the Deposit: Reckless Dissent Against Church Doctrine
35. Women’s Ordination: An Ancient Heresy & a New Church
36. Trust the Holy Spirit’s Guidance of the Pope & Magisterium
37. What is the Mind & Attitude of Christ Regarding Women’s Ordination?
38. Does Not the Apostolic Tradition Support the Male-Only Priesthood?
39. Not Women’s Ordination But Subordination
40. The Ultimate Revolution: Can Women Become Men?
41. Capacity for Ordination: Another Difference Between the Sexes
42. Links on the Subject of Women Priests
Debate with J. Cecil on Women Priests, Part 1
Debate with J. Cecil on Women Priests, Part 2
Response to Clare About WOMEN’S ORDINATION
Janice Sevre-Duszynska wanted to be a priest so badly that she was willing to commit mortal sin and get herself excommunicated to do it. That sounds a bit contradictory in my mind, given that priests are supposed to be of one mind and heart with the Church and to be ministers of reconciliation. She attempted ordination back on August 9 and now thinks of herself as a priest. However, the Church never affirmed her calling and insists that as a woman she cannot be a true priest. We are talking about more than a juridical status. Yes, her priesthood is illicit, but more importantly it is invalid. There are no priestesses in the Catholic Church. That means any attempts at giving absolution will leave people in sin and that any liturgies will neither be a re-presentation of the sacrifice or Calvary nor can she consecrate bread and wine as Christ’s body and blood. It is all a sham, a play-acting by a person disposed neither by gender nor by temperament for Holy Orders.
Pope John Paul II wrote the following to the bishops back in 1994 about “why” women could not be ordained:
1. The example recorded in the Sacred Scriptures of Christ choosing his Apostles only from among men.
2. The constant practice of the Church, which has imitated Christ in choosing only men.
3. Her living teaching authority, which has consistently held that the exclusion of women from the priesthood is in accordance with God’s plan for his Church.
Here is a video of janice’s ordination:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3555361321179635589
Bishop Dana Reynolds, first U.S. bishop, elected by the western region presides at ordination of Janice Sevre Duszynska in Lexington, Kentucky on Aug. 9th, 2008. In this clip she prays the Prayer of Consecration in the ordination rite as she and the community extend hands over Janice.
Janice Sevre-Duszynska sees herself as both a woman priest and as a married priest. Married she may be, but she is no true priest. Note that her so-called ordination took place at the Unitarian Universalist Church in Lexington. Unitarians are not even real Christians. They deny the Trinity!
Womenpriests ministers ”mainly to those on the margins,“ according to a statement by Bishop Patricia Fresen. ” … fallen-away Catholics, driven-away Catholics, those who cannot worship with integrity in any of the regular parishes, gays and lesbians, those remarried without annulment, people from other Churches who wish to join our worshiping communities … .“
Sevre-Duszynska, 58, a Jessamine County resident and grandmother of three, has protested the church’s stance for the last decade.
In 1998, she disrupted the ordination of a Lexington priest at the Cathedral of Christ the King by pleading with then-Bishop J. Kendrick Williams to ordain her as well. In 2000, she impersonated a reporter to attend an annual meeting of Catholic bishops in Washington, D.C., where she grabbed the microphone and again called for the ordination of women. And in 2002, she was arrested as part of a group protesting ordination of deacons by the Catholic Diocese of Atlanta.
“To refer to God only in masculine terms empowers men but diminishes women,” said Sevre-Duszynska (pronounced sev-ruh duh-SHIN-ska). “It affects how women are treated, how their children are treated. We come from God also.”
Sevre-Duszynska believes that Catholicism is too exclusive. “Roman Catholic Womenpriests believe in inclusivity — men, women, married, divorced, disabled,” she said.
Sevre-Duszynska began her preparation for the priesthood 10 years ago with night classes at Lexington Theological Seminary. She is working to complete her doctor of ministry with Global Ministries University, based in California.
She sees herself as an itinerant priest, not a parish priest.
Dear Sara and Father,
I know how Sara feels because, not so long ago, I too questioned how it could be that the Church “denied” ordination to women. Even though I personally preferred to relate to a male priest, I thought it a matter of social justice that women be permitted to become priests.
Then one day I realized it came down to three questions:
1) Did I believe that Christ was God? Yes.
2) Did I believe that God is omnipotent? Yes.
3) Did I believe that God is omniscient? Yes.
Well if Jesus is God and he did not ordain women, the only reason could be that God chose to not ordain women. It can’t be that Jesus was culturally conditioned; nor even that the Jews were so conditioned. (Remember in His omniscience, God could have chosen both Aaron and Miriam to be made priests, thus making female priests commonplace to the Jews.) I don’t know why God chose this. But I do firmly believe that neither I, nor anyone, now or then, has any better idea than God and I accept His will.
Mary
Thanks for showing the gymnastics involved to justify heretical ideas.
Heresy seems to always begin when someone challenges authority. Ironically, the mere challenge reveals that heretics have no interest in the Church Christ established.
If I wanted to change the rules of football, then I would not be interested in playing an authentic game of football.
Those who wish to “change the rules” are not in the truth business, they are in the self-gratification business–and are getting their reward.
“These priestesses are not humble in the face of the divine mystery.”
Well, they’re not humble in the face of the Boys with Funny Hats Who Announce All the Rules, but that’s hardly the same thing, now, is it?
According to the Spring 2008 newsletter of the Rochester, NY, Catholic Worker House, a woman named Chava Redonnet is preparing to exercise her ministry at the Rochester Catholic Worker as a “priest” once she is “ordained”. Many of the leaders of this Rochester house who are good people, have unfortunately been led away from the Catholic Church by Fr. Callan’s breakaway Spiritus Christi Church here in Rochester. It looks like a trend, unfortunately.
Couldn’t help noticing that no one’s refuting God’s comment. I certainly won’t.
Father Joe,
That the Last Supper was, essentially, the first Mass, couldn’t the fact that Jesus chose not to include his female disciples (namely, Mary Magdalene) be an argument that He wanted His priests to be men and not women?
God chose 12 men to preach His message.
These so called “women priest” automatically excommunicate themselves from the body of Christ. They’re leading people away from the true God in the Eucharist. The people who follow them are also in mortal danger.
Mark 9:42 “But if anyone causes one of these little ones who trusts in me to lose faith, it would be better for that person to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone tied around the neck.
They don’t realize what they’re doing.
So many opinions…so many views. But only one is valid and only one is false in the spiritual realm.
Our Lord and Savior was very clear about this issue. He ordained men and only men. He was the origional real feminist, giving women as much due as men. But in regard to ordination, it was only given to men.
That should be a deal sealer for us mere humans. But as you can see on this blog site, the debate rages on. Why? Because the devil is in the mix. For those who don’t know what time we are now in, I suggest you begin to pay attention to the Mother of our Lord and Savior. Her messages are clear and powerful. These ARE the beginnings of the end times. And in them, the spiritual warfare that has gone on since Adam and Eve fell from grace, is now growing more and more visible…even to many who do not have much knowledge of religious things. Good and evil do circle around each other and us humans are the battlefield. We are the prize. For our Lord and Savior, we are His lost sheep. For Satan, we are reminders of why he rebelled from the Father Almighty and thus we are to be destroyed. How? Go read the screwtape letters. Satan tries to get in our heads and mess with our conscience so that he can take us off course and get us to miss the mark…the gate. We are called to become like Christ so that we can enter into heaven. And yet…at every turn and every subject there is the truth and the lie. like we are pawns in a huge eternal chessgame and we don’t even often know if we are a white piece or a black piece (light or darkness…not a racial comment). We seek knowledge and yet most have totally forgotten that full wisdom comes from God above and all of the mockery of that and the scriptures and the Holy Mass and the scaraments and of our priests comes from the prince of liars. And so does this latest movement. The devil is very crafty…all he needs to do to mess up your chance at salvation is to get you to veer off course just a little…just change one thing (like the sex of the priest) and all will be fine. NOT. God is almighty. We are mere infintesimal ants in the scheme of things. His grace and His mercy are amazing and He seeks us out. But so does the devil with his lies and distortions of the truth. Such is this debate. Some see it for what it is…a contest of the truth versus a lie. But many think it is just one more relative arguement and can’t grasp what the big deal is or why can’t there be equality everywhere. If we had an oportunity to briefly die and go to heaven and come back to life…we whould KNOW what the truth is. Millions have in this country, but few share that journey. I have been blessed to know six who did and I have thus no doubts about the teachings of our church. It was THE one that Jesus started with Peter as our first shepard. Now there are some 25,000 protestant and baptist churches and many of our brothers and sisters who are saved in those churches just don’t have the full view of the heavens that we Catholics do. The book of wisdom is literally missing from all buit Catholic bibles. Gee…I wonder whose origional idea that was? God gave the Pope the ability to bound sins or loose them. He gave that to the Bishops. They then gave it to the Priests. They can give us absolution in the sacrament of confession. But no one else can. Not one woman can or any man who is not a priest. Thats the way He set it up and try as Satan does…he will never be able to change that. He knows that…but he manipulates women to seek the priesthood…for in their heresey…he has taken their souls captive. THAT is the tragedy…not some false need to be “equal” to male priests. God made us wonderfully different…both in our physical department, in our biological duties and in our temperment. He loves us all equally. But he gave us different roles. For a reason.
He loves his mother fully because a bit of his DNA still resides in her and their hearts were and are truly intertwined. Ask Mary if you don’t get why Women can’t be priests. She will tell you why. And in case you didn’t know it…Mary is the most perfect human being ever created…more so than any priest. And more so because of her humility. For in our humility we are drawn into Jesus Christ to become one with him. In humility and suffering (by taking up our crosses). Not by trying to be more than what our destiny is suppose to be. It is sad for me to see women doing this rebelling. They are walking away from Christ when they do…not towards him.
I am proud and blessed to be a woman. I don’t consider myself less than a man because I was not called to be a priest. My calling is simply different than a man’s! Scripture says that He knew us before we were formed; well if that is true, and I believe that it is, than God called me to the vocation of a WOMAN! Just because that vocation doesn’t put me front and center doesn’t mean that I don’t have a calling to lead others to Christ or preach the Gospel! As a woman I have greater freedom than most men (priests included) to serve the poor and take them the Good News of Jesus Christ! Think about the influence women have over children; especially mother’s! This is the greatest blessing that can be bestowed on a human being and it belongs exclusively to women! Should you be jealous Fr. Joe?? Perhaps Jesus was supposed to be preparing the world for men to give birth too!?
Continue to fight the good fight of the Lord for both women and men!
In His Love!
Mary (a Servant of Christ)
For these women who believe that they are “called” to the priesthood I will quote a prayer line for them….”MAY GOD REBUKE THEM, WE HUMBLY PRAY” Prayer and fasting for these women might help and a pinch of humility and obedience, remembering Padre PIO’s humility and sacrifice .
Lara wrote: “That the Last Supper was, essentially, the first Mass, couldn’t the fact that Jesus chose not to include his female disciples (namely, Mary Magdalene) be an argument that He wanted His priests to be men and not women?”
Sure, but wouldn’t that also provide an equally good argument that he wanted only men to take communion?
I mean, logically speaking.
I will say, though, that I’ve noticed that when women gain entry into a men’s group, or when they take a more active role in leading organizations (including churches), the men often drift away and everything sort of cools off. I think men prefer do things in a fraternal way, and the presence of women sometimes kind of screws up the dynamic.
Mind you, I’m not advocating any position here. Just making an observation.
No one seems to have mentioned that all sacraments, which are signs of the reality they represent, must in some manner conform to that reality. Ordained priests are living signs of Christ in all his human, male gender. This is important for a deeper understand of both sacramental theology and gender.
This whole issue also leads me to wonder if dissenters such as Janice are not, at some deep level, annoyed that the Son of God was male. One thing seems clear, however. There is no persuading such persons. It sometimes seems an awful shame we have to waste time arguing over a gift from God instead of accepting it and thanking Him for it. The practices of this woman and those like her are like flies outside a screen door at a party. They keep buzzing to get it and ruin the celebration, but they will not.
Randy,
I love your words “for in our humility we are drawn into Christ to become one with Him–in humility and suffering.” What a powerful and beautiful truth!
Thank you for that most beautiful and spirit-driven post, one which I read over and over and was very touched by. Many will not see the plain truth and how the duplicity of Satan is risking so many of God’s people to hell.
And Mary, I go along with you–proud and blessed to be a woman and daughter of our wondrous Lord and His mother, our very own loving and gentle mother–the Blessed Mary.
Janine
I’m sorry to hear about this development at the Dorothy Day House in Washington. Poor Dorothy — that her name is associated with this radical break with the Church.
Dorothy would be appalled.
I’ve written to Art Laffin, a member of the Dorothy Day House, to urge the community — assuming your report is true — to change the name of the house and also not to make any claim that it is Catholic.
One of the strengths but also weaknesses of the Catholic Worker movement is that it is de-centralized. There is no central administration. This makes it easy for a small group of people to start a house of hospitality, and in doing so help people in need. But, as there is no licensed use of the name “Catholic Worker,” any community can identify itself it as being a part of the Catholic Worker movement, no matter now alienated they may in fact be from the Catholic Church, as clearly is the case of the house in Washington.
Wait a sec — if women really weren’t present at the Last Supper, then who performed the initial part of the seder — the lighting of the lamps/candles, and the recitation of the Baruch atah Adonai, etc blessing? That part of the ritual is traditionally performed by a woman.
JOHN: Unfortunatly Father Joe, this is your and the reformers of the Catholic church’s fault. Oh, so many lovely people want so bad to “particpate” after Vatican II in the mass, between doing all of the readings except the Gospel, and yes I have even been to mass where the gospel was read by laypersons and is almost now always read by the Deacons, handing over our Lords body and blood by the so called “ministers”, the new mass with all of its “responses”, wow!! What a great thing, maybe I can brag to all of my friends back at bingo that I am a eucharistic minister It is all a sham and has emasculated the priesthood, from guitar strummin nuns in their pant suits, to altar girls, to all of the above
FATHER JOE: You know, I am seriously thinking about banishing you from this Blog with the anti-Catholic atheists. You consider yourself a good Catholic but then condemn the living Church. I suppose you prefer the company of schismatics and traditionalist excommunicants? Maybe not, but I am sick of getting insulted by people like you. The Holy Father makes the old Mass more available for those who want it and still all you can do is deride the revised rituals preferred by others and also approved by the Church.
The reforms are not the cause for women priests advocates and the widespread dissent. The Church had battled Modernism for many decades before Vatican II. We were successful at quieting it for awhile, but not at killing it. It waited its time and is now back to haunt us.
While attached to the old forms, your general attitude or manner toward the living Catholic Church is more akin to that of the dissenters and these priestesses than to the true faith. I even heard there were a few gals offering the liturgy in Latin… I know one Anglican gal who offers the traditional Mass… you should look her up!
Are you rejecting the authority of Pope Benedict XVI? Anyone who does, has more in common with these priestesses than with me or the Church. You should not ridicule the Catholic Church!
That church to which break-away traditionalists say they are loyal is a projection based upon what they read in history books and memories smoothed by time and age. You might agree or disagree with the Catholic Church, but it is not your place to mock her ministers or to take it upon yourself to interpret her documents. Such an attitude, expressed by critics and “sede vacantists” like Matatics, is just an extension of the Protestant view of private interpretation, albeit now over both Scripture and Tradition.
You malign good and holy people who assist our priests in proclaiming God’s Word and in distributing his Eucharistic sacrament to the multitudes. As for the responses, many of these were extended from the server to the congregation by Pope Pius XII in the Latin dialogue Mass. But enough of this, you do not care what I or anyone else has to say. You come to this Blog, not to contribute but to chastize and ridicule the Church. Well, I am going to get the last word.
JOHN: When I read the Vatican I documents, and the infallibility of the Pope and when elected by the conclave, that he must safeguard sacred tradition, do you possibly think the Church fathers back in 1870 knew a bit more than they were leading onto?
FATHER JOE: Pleeease! How can you possibly believe in papal infallibility and say the things you do? The mocking Prussians of the time misunderstood it, thinking it had political overtones. John Henry Newman opposed the making of such a definition and afterwards became its defender and apologist. Do you think papal infallibility means that one dead pope can tie the hands of another (living) pope regarding accidentals? This is nonsense. Every Pope, in his words and actions, is the Roman Rite. The Church follows the Pope. He can speak in solemn proclamations upon matters of faith and morals, matters that must be accepted by all the faithful. Such teachings are expressions or developments upon the deposit of faith. Counciliar teachings are also protected by the Holy Spirit and must be confirmed by the See of Peter. However, even in his ordinary teaching authority, Catholics are obliged to render “religious assent”. Do you give this level of respect to the Holy Father? Some so-called traditionalists would usurp the Pope’s role, thinking they know better how to preserve Sacred Tradition… nonsense!
JOHN: We have reaped what we have sowed, and once you open the floodgates, they are hard to close as once morals and tradition are compromised, sort of like being a parent with discipline, you have lost the battle Till the above is corrected my family and I raise our children by going off to an indult mass by FSSP and search out for them to learn their catechism by nuns in habits and attire, the Baltimore Catechism I might add So very sad
FATHER JOE: You are certainly welcome to attend Masses presided over by the FSSP. They are good men and I have friends among them. But while they offer the older form of the sacraments, they are priests loyal to the Magisterium and the post-conciliar Church. The reform of the Mass was a very small part of the work of Vatican II, and many contend that the liturgists went somewhat beyond their mandate. This is being corrected today. Some of the FSSP joined after being ordained as priests who offered the reformed rites. I went to seminary with a couple of them. Others have since entered and have even been ordained by the older ritual. These men accept the reformed rituals as valid and licit. However, they themselves have chosen to offer the older forms exclusively. This is fine and good. But you are not on the same page with them.
It is sinful for a Catholic to deride the Holy Father or any priest who struggles to be faithful. Must I censure your words or limit your access to this Blog to keep you from sinning by your slander, even against me?
Seventeenth Sunday After Pentecost / Old Calendar (Today!)
COLLECT: Da, quaesumus, Domine, populo tuo diabolica vitare contagia: et te solum Deum pura mente sectari.
EPISTLE: Brethren, I, a prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that you walk worthy of the vocation in which you are called. With all humility and mildness, with patience, supporting one another in charity, careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. One body and one spirit, as you are called in one hope of your calling. One Lord, one faith, one baptism. One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in us all, who is blessed for ever and ever. Amen. (Ephesians 4:1-6)
Twenty-Third Sunday of Ordinary Time (New Calendar)
RESPONSORIAL: Come, let us bow down in worship; / let us kneel before the LORD who made us. / For he is our God, / and we are the people he shepherds, the flock he guides.
for Randy,
Jesus told St. Faustina that there will be three days and three nights of darkness over the entire Earth before He comes again to call this world to judgment.
We are at the end, undoubtedly. Jesus told us that no one knows the day nor the hour of His return, but we can tell by the signs of the times.
I’ll give you some examples, to name a few:
The universal abandonment of God
Abortion of millions of innocent children
Greed
Lust
STD’S
Women priests
same sex unions
Corruption of every kind
Scandals in the world
global warming
horrific cataclysmal events
economic and social ruin
increase in crime and murder
warfare
TERRORISM
The killing of innocent Terri Schindler Schiavo
HOW MUCH MORE DO WE EXPECT THE GOOD LORD TO TAKE?
WHAT ELSE DOES GOD HAVE TO DO TO GET OUR ATTENTION?
Jesus also told St. Faustina this:
Souls perish in spite of My bitter Passion. I am giving them the last hope of salvation; that is the Feast of My Mercy. If they will not adore My mercy, they will perish for all eternity.” (Diary, 965)
PLEASE KEEP THE DIVINE MERCY IMAGE IN YOUR HEARTS AND IN YOUR HOMES.
HIS MERCY IS HIS GREATEST ATTRIBUTE!
The devil HATES mercy.
He already knows where he’s going. He has a strong hold of his short rope and he’s dragging down with him as many as possible.
The world needs to REPENT and we can’t blame the clergy for people abandoning God.
I’m not an expert on eschatology, but I know what Jesus told Faustina.
“Given my affection for Dorothy Day, this is a hard post to write. I was always afraid that the radicalism of The Catholic Worker movement might one day target the Church in such a way that it would sever its ties”
I haven’t presently got the time to read past your first couple of sentences, but I hope to return to this post with more depth and consideration. I have already voiced my opposition on a Catholic Worker email list on this issue and over the phone to friends attending this event.
This isn’t radicalsim, as you argue, it is liberalism. The Catholic Worker is often seen as a soft target by groups without a constituency, or trying to broaden the one they’ve got, to push thier own conservative, liberal or “radical” agendas. I guess it’s because we’re just so damn hospitable! But hey our strengths are our weakness.
Such liberals, and thier agendas, have come and gone in our history and we roll (in our decentralised fashion with a surprising level of coherency in both belief and praxis rooted in the vision of Peter and Dorothy) on as we are grounded in the simple praxis of radical christianity – community, acts of mercy, nonviolent prophetic resistance.
We are a lay movement – one would think for folks not attracted to (the unfortunately as presesently constituted upward mobility of ) ordiantion.
Like the church itself there is a lot of debate within the Catholic Worker movement (you can’t really employ the word organisation can you?) about such side issues. So Condalleza Rice is Secretary of State, so Colin Powell got to lead the U.S. military (he was down to lead the procession in Atlanta on MLK Day ‘91 but was too busy bombing a 3rd. World Country at the time to make it)…this wasn’t the radical vision of King…and this isn’t the radical vision of Day.
It’s amazing the Catholic Worker survives and thrives with such coherency afterthe deaths of our founders, when you consider how inclusive we are….A miracle really.
Ciaron O’Reilly
Catholic Worker 30 years
http://www.peaceontrial.com
This is all very sad. Dorothy Day was a faithful Catholic woman, and her fidelity was often at odds with the attitudes of others at Catholic Worker. I wonder why it is that people who flock towards CW accept her pacifism and solidarity with the poor but not her orthodoxy?
Incidentally, it always strikes me that these so-called “Womenpriests” are always elderly ladies with husbands or lesbian partners. Are there any young, celibate Catholic women (you know–female versions of actual 20-something seminarians) jonesing to be “ordained” “Womenpriests”?
Father, when you get wind of debacles such as these, would you please email me? I would have had that thing picketed, had I known. Thanks.
A good book to read on the subject of Dorothy Day and what she supported and did not support, amongst many other things is:
The Catholic Worker After Dorothy:
Practicing the Works of Mercy in a New Generation
by Dan McKanan
Liturgical Press, 2008
ISBN:978-0-8146-3187-4
240 pgs., $19.95
JOHN: Father Joe, You seem to make so many accusations and draw so many conclusions just by my pointing out that so much that the church has held fast for 1900 years was done away with in one instant, much of which is not even in the liturgical reform promulgate by V2
FATHER JOE: But the fact is that except for accidentals, the Church has not abandoned either the sacraments or anything from the deposit of faith.
JOHN: And you defense of Eucharistic ministers has to make me wonder what exactly you think of St Thomas and other Doctors of the church who proclaimed that only Ordained hands should touch the body of Christ
FATHER JOE: Pious expressions change over time. What is important is that the Church still believes that the Eucharist is the real body and blood, humanity and divinity, of the risen Christ. Is it any less my Lord if it comes from the hands of someone not a priest? Laymen among the early martyrs transported the host to others awaiting death for the faith. There is no absolute law against the laity helping with the distribution of Christ’s sacrament. The practice can be abused, but I will not condemn good and holy people who help us in this regard.
JOHN: Do you put yourself, and your sacrament of Holy Orders, on the same plane as that of a layperson?
FATHER JOE: If you like the old Church then you should consider how you wag your tongue at me. If I recall correctly, it was not the place of the laity to question priests and definitely not to ridicule them. Evidently you put yourselves above me and even the Holy Father.
JOHN: If one so badly wants to “participate”, maybe they can do the following, as my wife and I do along with so many of those bad “traditionals”
1.Pray the Rosary at old age retirement homes
2.Donate our time at Soup Kitchens that are Catholic
3.Pray the Rosary in front of Abortion Clinics hoping for a few “turn arounds”
Maybe these so called “ministers” can do likewise?
FATHER JOE: There is nothing wrong with traditionalism. What is wrong is your attack upon the faith and worship of Catholics in good standing who disagree with you and prefer the reformed rites.
You are very presumptuous about me and the laity who serve in the contemporary Church. I regularly say Mass at the nursing homes. The laity help me in setting up and in caring for the sick. We pray the rosary and remember the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary. My parish supports the S.O.M.E soup kitchens and we feed and help out some 600 poor families a month. We pray the rosary outside abortion clinics and some of my friends were arrested a few weeks ago for just holding up signs and praying. We do all those things and more. Do you think you are better than them? You have some views about Vatican II that just do not reflect the faith and ministry of any priests. The life of the Church is still witnessing fruits of holiness and charity. I am sorry that you are too angry and closed-minded to see it.
JOHN: Father, Oh how I do respect you, respect you for being a wonderful priest and I can see how and what a good man you are
FATHER JOE: The trouble is your tone. There are instances where you seem aware of the problem as well… Regarding a so-called woman priest saying Mass at the local Catholic Worker House, you write, “Unfortunately Father Joe, this is your and the reformers of the Catholic Church’s fault.” It certainly is NOT my fault! You are accusing me of complicity with heresy! You backed off to certain statements about the bishops, “I take back my statement on Bp Gregory, not Christian of me” and in another comment, “My apologies for broad brushing the priesthood.” Such things are hard to take back and they fuel the assaults of the Church’s enemies! You also write, “Just like the Pharisees who handed over our Lord to be crucified, those that are ordained to protect him, are once again handing him over to be mocked and desecrated, but are blind and don’t have the guts to protect him and demand the reverence he deserves.” That is a hit way below the belt.
JOHN: But what you cant quite understand is that those who actually are being told we are wrong for wanting to worship as the church had done for the first 1970 years are somehow bad, sinister and above the Holy Father
FATHER JOE: Except for certain liturgists, critics outside the Church and maybe a few French bishops, who is saying negative things about Traditionalists loyal to the Holy See? The Pope is on the record about the old Mass.
JOHN: It was the church that changed, not us.
FATHER JOE: Many accidentals have changed, even the world has changed more in the last century than in all previous world history. But the faith remains the same. That is where we must be. That is the emphasis.
JOHN: If we are wrong now as Traditionals-was the church wrong then?
FATHER JOE: When it comes to the trappings of faith, change does not mean that one form is right and another is wrong. There is nothing wrong with the Old Mass, but it was never thought of as perfect. Similarly, the reformed liturgy still stresses the sacrifice of Calvary and the real presence of Jesus. The Council of Trent essentially froze the basic structure of the liturgy, while omitting certain items and forcing a composit of many others. Nevertheless, the Mass as we knew it had been slightly altered or had additions from time to time. Latin-English (parallel text) missals themselves were absolutely forbidden until fairly recent times. The new reformed Mass dropped the double-absolution at the beginning and retained the one least like the formula used in Confession. Offertory prayers that anticipated the consecration by speaking of the bread and wine as victim were dropped and replaced by ancient Seder table blessings. It was feared that vernacular versions might confuse people about the actual Eucharistic transformation and/or that the congregation would see a parallel oblation of some lesser sort in the Offertory.
JOHN: Then we are told that the old mass is bad, no good, and had to have a schism take place for the Pope to allow limited use with permission from liberal bishops who hate us, but at the same time the Pope on down are promulgating ecumenism and meeting with and praying with Jews, Protestants, Moslems, Hindus (are not Hindus even pagans as they worship idols?) on down the line, but since 1970 I have yet to see a Pope pray with a traditional schismatic sect but has met time and again with other schismatics and with even those that deny our Lord!
FATHER JOE: Those who said the old Mass was “bad” did not speak for the Church, unless you are interpreting such a false view of those who prefer the Missal of Pope Paul VI. I firmly believe the Tridentine Mass and associated rituals would have seen new life through indults even without the dissent of schismatics and excommunicants. As I predicted, they are not returning to full unity in great numbers. Their dissent is not just with the liturgy but as with the Protestants, is one of ecclesiology and authority. While the Holy Father is generous in permitting the older ritual, the so-called breakaway traditionalists castigate the reformed liturgy and rites at every opportunity. Fortunately, while they blaspheme against God’s sacraments and Eucharist, they do not speak for the Church, either. Anyone who ridicules the validity of the current priesthood and the reformed Mass stands in opposition to the Holy Spirit who still gives efficacy to the sacraments. One might not like every element of ritual, just as the older rites had faults, but they must still be esteemed as good because of the reality and fruits they make manifest.
As for Ecumenism, it must be properly understood and one would do well to look very closely at how Pope Benedict XVI has spoken to non-Catholics. He chooses his words with great deliberation. He recently reaffirmed the Vatican II teaching that the Catholic Church is the true Church. The Orthodox of the East can call their communities “churches” because they have genuine sacraments, the priesthood and Eucharist; but they are “defective” because they do not accept the full authority of the See of Peter. Given that Protestant faith communities have neither the priesthood nor the Eucharist, they are termed, “ecclesial communities”. They call upon the saving name of Jesus. They also recite in faith the Lord’s Prayer. The Catholic Church does not embrace religious indifferentism. All salvation truth and everything necessary for salvation subsists in the Roman Catholic Church. There is no reason why Christians cannot add their voices from various confessions when we call upon the Lord Jesus, call God our Father, and invoke the Holy Spirit. Indeed, the original purpose of ecumenism, from the mouth and pen of Pope John XXIII was to make it easier for our separated brethren to come home to full unity. The idea was not to subtract from doctrine, but to make our teachings better understood and to express them in a more welcoming language. I would not deny that some went far beyond these parameters. Even those who orchestrated gatherings for the popes sometimes made serious mistakes. Pope Benedict XVI, even as Cardinal Ratzinger, had made note of these and urged corrections. When it comes to relationships with non-Christian groups, the greatest care must be taken. The Jews are a separate case given the ancient axiom from Scripture that “salvation comes from the Jews”. Their Hebrew Scriptures constitute the Old Testament to our Bibles. The God of Abraham is the Father of Christ, and our Father through spiritual adoption. While some Jews take offense at it, the Church recently insisted that the reproaches include a petition for the Jews to come to the fullness of faith in Christ. As for the Moslems, it is argued that their one God is the same as that of both Jews and Christians. This represents a special connection with us; however, their holy book or Koran, while treated with human respect, cannot be apprised by the faith as anything but a collection of distortions and error. It is not inspired and is not God’s revelation to men. Other religions like Hinduism and Buddhism represent special challenges. The late Pope John Paul II got criticized when he characterized Buddhism as a type of atheism. And yet, this philosophy or way of life posits no divinity and no personal survival as such. Hinduism was traditionally viewed as a polytheistic faith, but some authorities claim that all the gods and goddesses are really expressions of a single deity. It would still not be clear that this so-called god would have any relation with the God who shows his face to us in Judeo-Christianity. It is for this reason that in gatherings, we do not pray any kind of sanitized or pagan prayers with them. They go off and do their thing and we do our own. Ecumenism here can only hope for the conversion of pagans and/or cooperation with them in making a better world. When the Holy Father recently met with such groups in Washington, he also stressed searching for the truth together. What he left unsaid was his certainty as the Pope and as a Christian, that such an intellectual search would lead to the discovery that Jesus Christ is Lord. The trouble is not Ecumenism but what sometimes passes for Ecumenism. The world is too small for us to ignore each other. We either learn to live together or prepare for a society torn and ineffective in moving forward and in promoting peace and human dignity.
JOHN: Oh and yes I do appreciate the “bone” that our Holy Father has thrown our way, but how many priests want to go against their bishop? On top of that, the Extraordinary form has to have overwhelming support. My Bishop told me they offer it in some church 1x a week and that with so many spanish and others there is no way they can afford to have this in the other 170 churches in other churchs in our diocese (yes-you heard correct)
FATHER JOE: The new indult is more than a bone. Some dozen churches in the Washington, DC area are now offering the Old Mass while before there was only one or two. Last week many priests met in Southern Maryland to learn how to offer the old Mass. Such things are happening throughout the U.S. and around the world. The Holy Father hopes that the old Mass and the reformed liturgy will grow side-by-side and influence one another, restoring a more organic development that was rushed after Vatican II. The old Mass is offered where people want it. This is all that the traditionalists had asked. You should be grateful. As for the Spanish Masses, these cannot be compared to the Tridentine liturgy. Spanish and English Masses are only variant vernacular expressions of the same reformed liturgy. The Tridentine Mass follows different rubrics and has a different complexity. It will be some time before there are sufficient priests capable of offering it. Most of the priests who once said it are now involved directly with the heavenly liturgy and banquet. Forty years is a long time.
JOHN: So mad? I think the above qualifies those that hold fast to the faith while still trying to remain in her deserve some credit, and those that have broken off as many of my family and friends have done going to SSPX, SSPV and Independents should be admired as well as the current events only are leading to a more liberal church and these brave souls only want to restore what was once the focus of the church-the worship of God and our Lord and not man
FATHER JOE: No, sir, I cannot admire sede vacantists, Latin schismatics or excommunicants. They are to be pitied, not praised. Giving them support online, makes you the very thing that you rail against, someone who has partnered himself with dissenters and the enemies of the true Church. Except for a fondness toward the archaic, there is little difference between these rascals and the Protestants who rejected the Pope and the living Church. You can kee your antipopes (SSPV) and that of the so-called independents. Just remind them that outside the Church there is no salvation and, as they are excommunicated, they are on the outside. I would nuance the teaching from the Fourth Lateran Council, but since they would not, let each one of them stand damned by his or her own words. Anathema sit!
You have chosen to worship within the context of the true Church. There is nothing wrong with a preference for the traditional Latin Mass. But do not think about giving safe harbor to the Church’s enemies. Any association with some of the groups you mention, I would place in the context of the Church’s ecumenical outreach. They talk and act like Catholics, but if you scratch the surface and find disdain and rejection for the Pope, you know you have found a fake.
I hope this doesn’t bring the conversation down, but you gotta love the irony in the name:
Father Roy Bourgeois
or as we might translate it from the French:
Father King Bourgeoisie.
JOHN: Father Joe, You seem to really miss my point, which is not new and today the Holy Father once again chastised priests for relying on laypersons to much to perfrom duties, as well as attibuted the demise of todays church on the destruction of the liturgy I still would like to find somewhere in the Vatican II reforms of the liturgy where it states that eucharistic ministers or communion in the hand are allowed-or something from Pope Paul VI for that matter?
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2008/0915/1221257219387.html?via=mr
FATHER JOE:
You cannot pick-and-choose that to which you will assent from the Holy Father. You must also not misinterpret a living Pope as badly as some traditionalists misunderstand dead ones. The Pope allows extraordinary ministers of holy communion. Their use is limited and conditions are set by Church law and norms. The article is not on the same page with your agenda, and neither are the Pope’s statements. He is speaking about the terrible situation in France that threatens to eventually hit other nations. His admonishment is to the whole Church of France, not just to the existing clergy.
The dire dilemma in France is the shortage of Roman Catholic priests. The laity have largely taken over the local churches and run them for themselves. It is not so much a matter of malice as it is desperation. There is a diocese in Northern France where there is only one priest for every 27 churches! The poor priest becomes a circuit rider who comes by once-in-a-while to say Mass and to consecrate a supply of hosts for reservation and communion services.
France has suffered under a secular humanism since the French Revolution. Even before Vatican II, Maisie Ward wrote a book asking the question, FRANCE PAGAN? The situation has grown ever worse. Children were often baptized but few families practiced and went to Mass. The diocese of Nice was forced in 2001 to reduce its 265 parishes to 47.
The problem is that the appointed lay person in priestless parishes is caring for the plant and directing the ministries. They offer “dry Masses” (minus the consecration) and adminster sacraments properly reserved to priests. Funerals are rarely conducted by clergy.
Many of these lay leaders (“relais locales”) are women. This is combined to the other ministries where a priest is absent. Not just musicians and parish administrative staff, but there are teams for parish visitation, counselors, lay ministers of the sick and holy communion, teachers for pre-Cana and religious education, and chaplaincies to hospitals and nursing homes.
The Pope is concerned that the remaining French Catholics will be denied the sacraments and Eucharist when the last of the priests die. Many of these lay workers are acting in good faith but they are being manipulated by those who want to force the Church to have women and married priests. This Pope is putting the ball back into their ballpark and telling them to encourage vocations to the priesthood among celibate men.
The warning from the Pope does not reject extraordinary ministers who help priests. What he opposes are lay ministries which replace the priest.
As for the liturgy, yes there are abuses, but I am not displeased by the reformed Mass and believe that it can be both beautiful and efficacious. Clowns, puppets, dancers and other such things are not part of the so-called new Mass. They are distortions.
Extraordinary ministers of holy communion and communion in the hand are concessions made by the Church after the Vatican II Council. They are elements of the Church’s ordinary governing authority. Neither are entirely new and can find precedent in the early Church. I suppose one might argue that they are implementations of general directives.
We seem to have drifted, or at least expanded, from the thread topic, which I thought was the ordination subject. I’ll reserve my comments for this subject alone, and say that, as a lay woman with considerable undergraduate & graduate theological background, in possibly the most liberal environment in the U.S., I don’t “get” the efforts of these women, never have. This is despite the influences around me, which have been heavily in favor of female ordination — although I see that for many of these women, their option has been to “leave,” if you will. I’ve heard all the arguments (pro), on and off this thread. I.m.o., these women have it all wrong, and have not heard the gospel message. Hello: It’s about Jesus, not about you! The same holds true for priests. Or, as Jesus would say, What do you not understand? Every single person is called to holiness, everyone. Maximum holiness, sublime holiness, holiness not dependent on one’s station in life. Did Jesus address mostly the priests? No! The message was for everyday people, unranked. The women in question are not hearing a call to Orders; they’re hearing a call to (greater) holiness, period. That is not achieved necessarily by ordination. I’ve known some movingly holy priests in my life (and still know them!); and — I don’t mean to be disrespectful — some rats. I don’t mean just the few who engaged in sexual abuse, but many more than that have abused their power in nonsexual ways, have caused scandal or have allowed scandal to flourish under their leadership in parishes (scandal mostly referring to the destruction of reputations, calumny, detraction, backbiting, the repetition of lies these priests knew full well & admitted full well were not true — it has happened to many wonderful lay people I have known, in many parishes). These priests were silent when they could have & should have spoken up. Many people have been disillusioned by priests with feet of clay who did not take initiative in guiding their flocks away from acts against charity within their own ‘households.’
One of the saintliest people I know is a humble elderly gardener from Italy who is probably illiterate. I employed him for maybe 15 years. During my most trying time in my life he came to my house and quietly gardened FOR FREE, refusing money. He ached with me and cried, yes cried, when I hurt. Is that not Christ-like?! Your station in life is no barrier to holiness, as well as no guarantee of holiness. When you’re a priest you have access to more resources toward holiness (prayer time, spiritual direction, education, confessors, daily Mass, peers sharing a similar goal) , but may I remind everyone that these resources & opportunities are often compromised by the daily tasks of priestly duties which include oversight of the parish (or a theology dept, etc.) & the related unglamorous details. You know, chores — just like business people & housewives have.
I think these women have a romanticized understanding of the (real) priesthood; they are constructing artificially a ‘priestly’ environment for themselves which in fact avoids many of the headaches real priests have. I’m not impressed. I appreciate truly holy priests very much. Whenever I hear a well-prepared, thoughtful sermon, I immediately thank the priest for that after Mass. But mostly, I am terribly grateful for the priests who empty themselves enough to be very spiritually & emotionally available during confession. I’m not receiving the priest’s grace. I’m receiving *God’s* grace! The priest is a vehicle: that’s all. To the extent that he is in fact holy & faithful & in grace himself, to that extent he is an effective, ‘empty’ instrument.
and another thing….
Anyone notice how a key ingredient is missing in the life/work of these would-be female “priests”? A, um, parish, maybe? Where’s the flock? I don’t see any flock stampeding to them. Are any of their followers male? That would maybe lend some credibility on even a human, let alone divine, level: if they had a significant, actual *following*. (What a concept) If it’s The Spirit, and not their egos, that is leading or “calling” them, I think we would see evidence of significant solidarity from male clergy, which is not there. I don’t mean an occasional rogue priest, defrocked priest, etc.
I am deeply disappointed in my sisters, and embarrassed for them. We need to pray for them. I went to school with one of them. She believed (as did others) that having a Master of Divinity after your name entitled you to priesthood. Um, the M.Div degree is essentially an academic degree. There are one or 2 courses not open to females, because they’re formation courses: Reconciliation (the process/practice) and maybe one more. Her point was that, with that exception, “everything else (that she learned) is exactly what a priest learns,” and that therefore females were being artificially & unjustly kept away from orders. Hey, it’s not an intellectual trip: it’s a spiritual trip. Priests get an awful lot of their training after ordination, and it used to be that they got much more of their formal theological education after ordination.
Yes, it’s a sacrilege that these women “offer Mass.” (They think that’s an actual consecrated host? Amazing.) That should bother me the most, but I guess I’m also a little struck by how immature it appears to me — like young children role-playing their parents’ roles with dress-up and props. Children do this sometimes as a way of compensating for the power differential between themselves and adults. But these are *grown* women we’re talking about; that’s what’s embarrassing. Grown women having a temper tantrum. I am even more offended, possibly, if they actually have the audacity to hear confessions. Talk about presumption! Well, I shouldn’t be so uncharitable. So I’ll segue into what I heard on EWTN last night. I only heard the tail end. Fr. Groeschel was talking with an elderly woman about something — I don’t know — and she brought up female ordination, in the negative. I think her last name is Hildebrand. She brought up Paul’s Letter to the Hebrews where he talks about not seizing spiritual authority on one’s own, as that is a sure sign that it is not a gift. Exactly. (Oh, but wait, I forgot: the same female that spoke with me, who is now a “womanpriest” by self-proclamation, also told me in grad school that she couldn’t accept much of Paul’s writings.) My response, as a scripture scholar myself, was privately to realize that she clearly misunderstands Paul, and she’s reading him “politically,” not spiritually, & I gently tried to tell her that. Which is by the way an anachronistic read of Paul & not even historical-critical, but that’s a whole other topic.
Bottom line to the above: these women are driven by political frustration. I saw it in grad school; I see it now. Now, in fairness, the one area in which I do agree with them is regard to simply female presence in the church, particularly in appropriate decision-making roles/leadership. NOT sacramentally. Fascinating that Fr. Groeschel on EWTN agrees with me. God bless him. Very interesting that his female upbringing allowed him to see how competent females were in leadership, formative roles. In my very humble (yes!) opinion, had the church been more open in years past to a critical, visible presence of females in crucial roles in church leadership, the sexual abuse, if/when it did happen, would have stopped much earlier, been aired much more quickly, and never have risen to the level of scandal & financial hurt that eventually cost the church so dearly. I’m talking lay women, not religious. Nothing wrong with religious being leaders as well, but the in-the-world voice of women should be better utilized. I believe it would help priests in many ways. So Fr. Groeschel thinks that the push toward ordination has really been about governance, & I couldn’t agree more. I thought it in grad school, I think it now.
What the “womenpriests” do not get, is that priests don’t have all that much power. Bishops do; clearly cardinals do. Sure, priests have more power than either lay or religious women, but it’s certainly limited, & they hardly spend most of their time engaged in policy-making, etc. They are, listen closely: pastors. That means service. That means sacrifice. That means humbling yourself. That means a life of mostly unglamour.
Let’s pray for these women who have gone astray. I veered myself (but not at all in that way!), and I’m convinced that the prayers of others brought me back .