Posted on 11/23/2012 3:32:15 AM PST by IbJensen
MARYKNOLL, NY, November 21, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has canonically dismissed Roy Bourgeois from the priesthood because of his public dissent from the Catholic Church’s teaching on the ordination of women. Bourgeois’ dismissal was announced by the Catholic Foreign Mission Society of America, also known as the Maryknoll Fathers and Brothers, in a Nov. 19 statement.
As a Maryknoll priest during 2008, Bourgeois participated in a mock ordination of a woman and a simulated Mass at a Unitarian church in Lexington, Kentucky. The radical feminist group Roman Catholic Womanpriests staged the ceremony.
Subsequently Bourgeois was given a “canonical warning” that his actions could result in his excommunication and expulsion from his religious order.
(Roy Bourgeois with two women who attempted to be ordained in the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church teaches that it does not have the authority to ordain women, and that any such ordinations are invalid.)
Bourgeois was given thirty days to recant his position, but instead he initiated a campaign against the Church, and published a letter insisting the Church was “wrong” on women’s ordination. “After much prayer, reflection and discernment, it is my conscience that compels me to do the right thing,” he wrote. “I cannot recant my belief and public statements that support the ordination of women in our Church.”
He went on to demand that “all Catholics, fellow priests, bishops, Pope Benedict XVI and all Church leaders at the Vatican ... speak loudly on this grave injustice of excluding women from the priesthood.”
The Vatican responded with a decree saying that any Catholic bishop who attempts the ordination of a woman or any woman who participates in such a ceremony, is subject to automatic excommunication.
This decree is backed up by the late Holy Father John Paul II’s 1994 Apostolic Letter, Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, in which he states, “In order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, ... I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.”
Bourgeois was excommunicated “Latae sententiae” (meaning “sentence already passed” or automatically) for not recanting his public stance supporting the ordination of women.
The Maryknoll statement says that while “the Holy See and the Maryknoll Society have encouraged his reconciliation with the Catholic Church,” the priest instead “chose to campaign against the teachings of the Catholic Church in secular and non-Catholic venues.”
“This was done without the permission of the local U.S. Catholic Bishops and while ignoring the sensitivities of the faithful across the country. Disobedience and preaching against the teaching of the Catholic Church about women’s ordination led to his excommunication, dismissal and laicization.”
Bourgeois, 74, called his expulsion from the priesthood and the Maryknoll order “very difficult and painful,” in a Nov. 20 statement published by the “Women’s Ordination Conference.”
“The Vatican and Maryknoll can dismiss me, but they cannot dismiss the issue of gender inequality in the Catholic Church,” the statement said. “The demand for gender equality is rooted in justice and dignity and will not go away.”
The Maryknoll Fathers’ statement says, “Mr. Bourgeois freely chose his views and actions, and all the members of the Maryknoll Society are saddened at the failure of reconciliation. With this parting, the Maryknoll Society warmly thanks Roy Bourgeois for his service to mission and all members wish him well in his personal life.
“In the spirit of equity and charity, Maryknoll will assist Mr. Bourgeois with this transition,” the Fathers conclude.
You just really don't get it, do you? Run along and play in a low head dam, or something, and let the grownups talk.
Catholics view Ordination as a Sacrament. sacraments are dogmatic practices established by Christ to draw us closer to Him. In order for a Sacrament to be valid you must have the proper form and use the proper order. The Form refers to the substance (material) and the order refers to the method. While it is possible to use the proper order (Proper prayers etc...) for a female "ordination" they lack the proper form. They are not male. Christ established this by ordaining only men.
Yada yada yada... I don't need to start anything. You posted what I consider ignorance, I responded with my opinion. We all have one, you know! God can be my Judge.
Truth was spoken here, according to MY Bible, thanks! I directed the comments about the Roman Catholic Church. Any members that love God, our Redeemer, are brethren (and sisteren ) of mine. If you wish to debate me with an actual Scriptural basis, take a number. I'm sorry your feelings may be hurt (not!).
You can study your catechism all you wish, but it won't get you through the Pearly Gates! If you attend services 14 times a week, it won't open those gates. If you go into your closet to pray, then there may be hope for you.
Only the Blood shed on the cross accomplishes that. Study the role of "Goel" and thank God, not your elegantly attired priests! I am one of Christ's kinsmen, chosen by Him, grafted like a tree limb. You can join us, or continue to blindly listen to your teachers. Being part of an organization is no security.
You are welcome to be an exception!
On a final note, I have already been paddling this morning... but thanks for the encouragement! I'll be back on the water tomorrow. At 65, it is a simple pleasure.
I didn't know it was any of your business, but you are welcome to check the list of MONTHLY's! There is NO REQUIREMENT to give anything...
Is that all you can come back with? I guess the truth IS difficult to refute... so deflection may work with some! But, not here!
See my #41 for reference, and as for grownups, I see many childish postings of bigoted nonsense to me, and absolutely nothing of facts!
Which one is you?
At 65 you’re still getting paddled?
Your replies again show your lack of a reasoned argument. It is difficult to accept truth, when all you know is what you learned in Sunday School, and grew up with the horrible thought of excommunication, should you think for yourself. Your church even withheld the Scriptures from the common parishioner until forced in the last century, preferring the Latin Vulgate over the lingua franca.
I'm apparently the ONLY grownup in this conversation... and I'm trying patiently to be a guide. As for being paddled, you continue to show your puerile streak and lack of intellectual response!
Romans 8: 31 What, then, shall we say in response to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? 32 He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all—how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things? 33 Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies. 34 Who then is the one who condemns? No one. Christ Jesus who died—more than that, who was raised to life—is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us. 35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall trouble or hardship or persecution or famine or nakedness or danger or sword? 36 As it is written:
“For your sake we face death all day long; we are considered as sheep to be slaughtered.”
37 No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. 38 For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, 39 neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Never said I was, but it is incongruous that the opulence illustrated is opposed by Scriptural admonitions...
I will pray for you, as well!
I'm an adult convert, so I am neither brainwashed by Sunday school nor afraid of excommunication (besides, who would be, seeing how long it took to get rid of Mr Bourgeois?) I studied and researched extensively before deciding to be received into the Church. She is the closest link with the Apostles and Our Lord, the historic Church, and I believe what She teaches to be true.
As General Cromwell said on another occasion, "I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken."
By the way, Scriptures were not withheld from anyone. Until quite recently, almost everyone was illiterate, and for educated people Latin WAS the "lingua franca". As recently as the 1950s, C.S. Lewis routinely corresponded in Latin with various European friends. I wound up with an Italian client (a long story) - he spoke no English and I no Italian, so we communicated in Latin.
Methinks you think too highly of yourself. In that you and the current occupant of the White Hut, Bronco Bama have much in common. Rather you are a sophomoric blatherer who delights in denigrating others' religion. Do you practice any 'organized' religion?
As to guiding, by your own vicious comments, you prove that you are incapable of guiding anything. Talking down a mainstream religion that's been around for over 2,000 years and wanting to change something that you're not even a part of is beyond ignorance.
Let decent God-centered religions alone. To attack its tenets and adherents shows a level of stupidity that would get you a government job where you could practice your guidance capabilities by marshalling co-workers and guide them to the toilet.
You must be retired as I am and have too damned much time on your hands. You know what they say about satan and idle hands...right?
Over 2000 years, huh? Sophomoric basically describes your POV and lack of effective response. My religion has been around since the inception of this world! I am a created being, grafted into the Jewish family. In my readings, God-centered religions don't prance around in gilt structures and fancy gowns... rather they go into all the world.
Please cite Scripture that justifies your ideas, and please leave out Peter, the guy who denied Christ. At least he realized his error and wept. But, Peter's role was preaching to the JEWS!
Please cite Scripture when you respond, and quit your belly-aching about my posts. You have not responded with anything but denigration and attempts to discredit what I have clearly stated, through your childish attempts at humor. According to Scripture. I am a saint. ALL BELIEVERS ARE SAINTS, and God is NOT a respecter of persons!
God spent a lot of effort to establish Paul as the speaker to the gentiles, and Peter historically was preaching to the Jews... read your entire Bible, and you may learn something besides those things which your leaders want to use to keep you under their tent! The Gospels are the Good News about Christ. Paul's writings are instructional about life in the Spirit. Yet, when cited, his teachers are lowered in preference to elevating your groups reign of terror (for reference, see:
The size of your group doesn't matter. Millions of lemmings jump over the cliffs and into the sea (Disney was partially correct!)... in attempt for survival. Many die, because they have been led astray by sightless leaders.
Have a nice life... I do, and will continue, through the Power of the Holy Spirit living in me!
Here's some history lessons for you to research for yourself...
THE INQUISITION:
A Study in Absolute Catholic Power
...Those who classify themselves as Christians can be divided into 2 broad groups: those who have chosen to allow the Bible to be their final authority and those who have chosen to allow men to be their final authority. For sake of simplicity, I shall refer to the first group as "Bible believing Christians." The latter group has always been best represented by Roman Catholicism, by far its largest, most powerful, and most influential component. The Roman Catholic hierarchy has always boldly stated that it is not dependent upon Scripture alone, but also accepts tradition as another pillar of truth -- and where a conflict exists, tradition receives the greater acceptance. Being its own arbiter of what is to be accepted as truth, it accepts no authority as being higher than itself. This explains why the Catholic belief system has been constantly evolving over the centuries.
This also explains why a fierce antagonism has always existed between Bible believing Christianity and Roman Catholicism. Rome's frequent spiritual innovations excites the passions of Bible believers, who react adversely to religious modifications that are at odds with the eternal, changeless Word of God. Harboring a supreme confidence in the Book, a trust which reflects their trust in the Holy Spirit who authored the Scriptures, the Bible believers boldly challenge the suppositions of the Catholic hierarchy. In the course of this spiritual warfare, Catholic people are frequently converted from trust in Rome's complex religious system to a childlike faith in the Saviour and a simple reliance on His Word. Many such converts ultimately leave the Church of Rome to join local, New Testament churches. Frequently in history, the trickle of individuals who were making this remarkable transformation turned into a flood. Such ruptures cannot go unchecked by the Catholic hierarchy. As with any bureaucracy, its primary interest is its own protection and propagation.
The nature of its response to the inroads made by spiritual challengers is dictated by its cultural surroundings. The more Catholic the culture, the more severe the response. In past centuries, when Rome's ecclesiastical power was virtually absolute throughout Europe, the intensity of the attacks by the papists upon their spiritual enemies could be equally absolute. Ignoring the injunction of II Corinthians 10:4 ("For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal..."), Catholicism built its own philosophical system to justify the use of carnal (fleshly, human, physical) means to achieve spiritual ends.
Having divorced herself from Biblical absolutes, Catholicism adopted a theology in which she sees herself as the church founded upon the Apostle Peter by Jesus Christ, and alone empowered to bring salvation to the world. Further, she believes herself assigned the daunting task of bringing Christ's kingdom to fruition on earth. With those dogmas forming her philosophical foundation, she seeks her power in the political sphere as well as the religious realm. To whatever degree she achieves political power, to that degree she feels compelled to use her secular influence as a weapon against her spiritual adversaries. Thus, down through the centuries, we see that in those countries in which Catholicism had achieved absolute power, the pope's followers have not hesitated to brutally subdue the enemies of "the Church". Although Jews, Moslems, pagans, and others have felt the wrath of Rome, her special fury has always been reserved for her bitterest and most effective challengers -- Bible believing Christians. Only as the political climate changed in recent centuries did the Catholic hierarchy see it expedient to change tactics and appear to be more tolerant. Yet, to this day we see persecution continuing in those places on the globe dominated by Catholicism. The degree of the persecution is determined by the degree of control. ... (-excerpted, click link above to read more.)
Then lay off the Christian bashing.
That is all you’ve done on this thread. You must lead a mean and ugly life if that’s all you’ve got to do all day. You’re as bad as the guy on another thread I posted that was anti-porn, who said he let’s his boys watch all they want and doesn’t mind that they’re little wankers.
Go attack him.
When you get your information from a writer who heads his article with a reference to the "Whore of Babylon" and sprinkles it freely with anti-Catholic propaganda, you and he are simply indulging yourselves in a mutual fact-free hate-fest and learning absolutely nothing.
You might as well go read the Awful Disclosures of Maria Monk for all the good it will do you. But you might believe that to be factual, I suppose.
"There are not over a hundred people in the United States who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions, however, who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church, which is of course, quite a different thing."
----Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen
I have observed a couple of things about female ministers while in our Former Denomination. Our parish was the training parish for the entire diocese, so I observed every newly ordained priest in our diocese for 28 years.
1. They almost always (NOT always) become ministers for their own reasons, not because they are called to be servants. Some were doctrinaire feminists, some very politically involved Democrats, one was a lesbian who 'came out' after ordination and brought her 'partner' to parish events (this was a number of years ago and she actually was fired. She wouldn't be today).
2. They aren't particularly competent. Of all those female 'ordinands', only one was in my opinion actually capable of running a parish (although she was eventually transferred from the parish she got to an inner-city mission, so who knows. But maybe she requested the assignment.) Some of them were pretty good preachers (in a very liberal vein) but none were Scripture scholars, none could really teach a class, none read Greek or Latin (I used to have some fun with that), none had much knowledge of church music, etc. etc. They were only keen on politics and feminism, mostly. See item 1.
3. They were absolutely no good at leading a parish, particularly on even mildly controversial matters (say, funding allocations in a year of 'down' receipts). I think it's because women who are not trained in a logical discipline like the law or engineering or science tend to fall back to 'dialogue' in any controversy. And what they mean by 'dialogue' is that everybody discusses the matter interminably, but the pastor will NOT make a command decision. And that always has to be done eventually, because in a good sized parish you can never make everybody happy.
"By their fruits shall ye know them."
Yeah, right. You guys and gals sure do emote a lot.
I would expect nothing else but rote responses. HOWEVER, there are lots of records available from OTRCC propaganda!
Here's a few excerpts from HISTORICAL RECORDS:
By the second half of the 18th century, the Inquisition abated, due to the spread of enlightened ideas and lack of resources. The last auto de fe in Portugal took place on October 27, 1765. Not until 1808, during the brief reign of Joseph Bonaparte, was the Inquisition abolished in Spain. An estimated 31,912 heretics were burned at the stake, 17,659 were burned in effigy and 291,450 made reconciliations in the Spanish Inquisition. In Portugal, about 40,000 cases were tried, although only 1,800 were burned, the rest made penance.-reference
****
Most trials resulted in a guilty verdict, and the church handed the condemned over to the secular authorities for punishment. Burning at the stake was thought to be the fitting punishment for unrecanted heresy, probably through analogy with the Roman law on treason. However, the burning of heretics was not common in the Middle Ages; the usual punishments were penance, fine, and imprisonment. A verdict of guilty also meant the confiscation of property by the civil ruler, who might turn over part of it to the church. This practice led to graft, blackmail, and simony and also created suspicion of some of the inquests. Generally the inquisitors were eager to receive abjurations of heresy and to avoid trials. Secular rulers came to use the persecution of heresy as a weapon of state, as in the case of the suppression of the Knights Templars. Reference
****
Several inquisitors' manuals have survived, among them those of Bernard Gui and Nicolas Eymeric. Other sources include checklists of standard questions and numerous official minutes of local inquisitions. Some of these materials have been published, but most exist in manuscript only.
The first inquisitors worked in central Europe (Germany, northern Italy, eastern France). Later centers of the Inquisition were established in the Mediterranean regions, especially southern France, Italy, Portugal, and Spain. The tribunal was used in England to suppress the Lollards (followers of the 14th-century reformer John Wycliffe). Queen Mary I of England (r. 1553-58) used the tribunal in her effort to reverse the Protestant Reformation. The Inquisition's long survival can be attributed to the early inclusion of offenses other than heresy: sorcery, alchemy, blasphemy, sexual aberration, and infanticide. The number of witches and sorcerers burned after the late 15th century appears to have been far greater than that of heretics. -reference
****
Torture could be used after 1252. On May 15, Pope Innocent IV issued a papal bull entitled Ad exstirpanda, which authorized the use of torture by inquisitors. Torture was undoubtedly used in the trial of the Templars, but is in fact not much found in heresy trials until the later fourteenth century. Torture methods that resulted in bloodshed, births, mutilation or death were forbidden. Also, torture could be performed only once. However, it was common practice to consider a second torture session to be a "continuation" of the first. Torture methods included hanging by the wrists, with weights suspended from the ankles (a form of torture known as strappado), the rack, and waterboarding. -Reference
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.