Posted on 09/08/2002 7:30:52 PM PDT by american colleen
While Father Z isn't sure about Mahony's plans for a priestless Church, he believes the archdiocesan hostility to traditional Catholicism has taken its toll on vocations. "I do know that a lot of priests have left. The cardinal likes a certain kind of priest. You can tell that they don't want vocations, because they do nothing to inspire vocations. He's purposely put a very liberal, feminist Sister (Kathy Bryant) as the vocations person.
"I think if we got a reasonable archbishop of Los Angeles, all of a sudden things would just switch. There's such a small minority of the real liberals and 'protestantized' Catholics that things would switch right away."
If Father Z's assessment of Mahony seems to contradict his gentle public image, Father Z is not alone in his view. Both Father Y and Father Z are firghtened of Mahony and spoke only on assurance of anonymity. "The cardinal is a tough man," one explained. "He will just crush you. He won't stop. I know of a priest who spoke out against something the cardinal was behind and he would not back off until the priest resigned. He even threatened to withdraw financial support. He has a lot of power because Los Angeles is one of the richest dioceses in the world and money is power. That's one of the biggest ways he throws his weight around.
"I pray for a real conversion (for Mahony). If he were to convert he would just be a powerhouse for the Church. He is a very engaging person. When he's in your presence, he really wins you over. He has a way of gauging you and he holds all his cards to his chest. He lets you break the ground and, once that happens, he's very agreeable to whatever you say. Everyone walks away from him saying, 'what a wonderful man!' When you're with him one on one, he really does fool you. It's when you find out what he's done later that you realize what you're dealing with, and it's not gentle. I know a lot of priests who have suffered under him. If you want holy priests, you need a holy bishop."
I attempted several times to reach Sister Kathy Bryant for response. She did not return my phone calls before this article went to press.
(Excerpt) Read more at losangelesmission.com ...
Read today's readings and then think about anger again.
If sin is a disqualifier for Jesus to work through a priest, then we would have absolutely no sacraments.
And if doubt as to a priest's being a "good person" affected the validity of sacraments, we would never know if we had every received a valid sacrament.
SD
On the question of priests being disciplined or removed if they can not live up to their vows, we are in agreement.
But surely you see the chaos that becomes if we need to know the state of grace of every priest who purports to celebrate "sacraments" with us?
SD
But how often does this actually happen? We're pretty much on our own in this respect. There is a priest here in the town I am living in who I absolutely refuse to have anything to do with. He is known around here as 'the keeper of the til'. He cares about money and little else. I had a run in with him in the previous town where we both lived and I have not forgotten. I will not have anything to do with him. There are many others who feel the same way.
Anyone can watch a priest for a while, keep their ears to the ground and get a sense for the person. The Scripture quote "by their fruits shall they be known" is most applicable here. I don't have to run a background check but I can certainly use my eyes, ears and mind.
A Priestless Church was good enough for the Apostles. What is wrong with a Priestless Church?
Your position is known as the Donatist heresy and was dealt with by Saint Augustine in the fourth century. The following column provides a good explanation of why the efficacy of the Sacraments are not destroyed by the unworthiness of the priest.
What complete and utter BS. Anyone who refuses to associate with a hypocrite is a heretic? Why even bother posting here anymore? It seems there is an Inquisition live and well here which seeks out anyone who refuses to blind themselves and fall in line. Disgusting.
My loyalty is to God, God's servants and God's Word, not to agents of the dark side or fallen human beings who are well entrenched in our Church. Open your eyes.
Incorrect. Jesus was of the priesthood of Melchisedech as Psalm 109 affirms and the word priest first appears in Scripture in Genesis 14:18 in reference to Melchisedech. Jesus made the Apostles the first priests in His Church.
You show your lack of knowledge in both the history of the Catholic faith and what the Sacraments truly are. The Church is not a club designed to allow you to socialize with members of the clergy. What's disgusting is that you think the efficacy of the Sacraments are dependent upon the worthiness of a priest. If that were the case the Sacraments could not be administered. The true minister of the Sacraments is Christ Himself and yes, denying that whether through ignorance or conscious rejection, heresy, is wrong. Had you read the link you'd know that. It is too bad that you were either never taught or choose to reject the teachings of the Church.
Misinterpreted? Better reread what you wrote but just to refresh your short memory span, you've stated what you believe. There's no room for misperception: #2 - I've have heard that the Sacraments are valid even when the priest is not the most holy person. Personally, I have a difficult time believing this. A corrupt priest would be a dirty container for the Spirit. How could the Holy Spirit act or reside there? I think a priest/Saint's abilities are directly related to their own purity. I will only go to Mass and take Sacraments from a priest I respect and know to be a good person, but that's just me.
The Donatists floated this same balloon over 1600 years ago. Face it toots, you're ignorant and St. Augustine isn't the only one to point that out. Ever read Summa Theologica? Ever learn what St. Francis of Assisi had to say about the worthiness of priests and the Sacraments? Ever learn what kind of person Francis was when he was a young man? Obviously not. St Francis de Sales said "But I'm here among you to prevent something far worse for you. While those who give scandal are guilty of the spiritual equivalent of murder, those who take scandal - who allow scandals to destroy their faith - are guilty of spiritual suicide."
What would you do if you had to attend Mass at a parish where you knew nothing about the priests? Deny yourself the Sacraments until you got to know which priest was good and which was bad? How long would that take? If on your deathbed would you deny yourself Last Rites because you didn't know enough about the priest administering them? You want to pick and choose what you want to believe and not believe that's up to you. You sound like all those "progressives" who doubt the Real Presence in the Eucharist or deny that life begins at conception. What else do you have a hard time believing: The Assumption? Immaculate Conception? Purgatory? The Magisterium? The Resurrection? The Incarnation? The virgin birth? Forgiveness of sins?
Go and give your parish priest, the one you like, a phone call and ask him if the efficacy of the Sacraments is dependent upon the worthiness of the priest and when he gives you the answer you don't want to hear, call him clueless, rude and unChristian. Whatever floats your boat kid, just don't claim to be a Catholic when you don't believe what the Catholic Church teaches.
You kindly provided the scripture references for the first part (Jesus is a Priest of the Order of Melchisidek, He was!), but you neglected to provide the scripture reference for the last part.
....
Father Y said ....
"I'm fully convinced that these people are absolutely committed to a priestless church. The whole new pastoral associates program that they are implementing in Los Angeles is basically lay people taking on the role of priests in everything except the sacraments. We were actually told that they are envisioning one priest per parish, assisted by several pastoral associates. You cannot promote vocations to the priesthood and prepare for a priestless church at the same time, and that's what they are doing."
Who is behind this drive for a priestless church? "I hate to say it," said Father Y, "but who else could it possibly be but the cardinal himself? He doesn't want the 'model' of church that we have had up until now. I don't know if he would say 'priestless;' he would say we don't need this number of priests. For instance, he readily will accept the resignation of any priest for retirement without asking any questions or trying to talk him out of it. Even if they are not at retirement age, he accepts every single one that comes in. It's as if they are hoping we have as few as possible, so that we will be forced to use these pastoral associates."
________
"What some refer to as a 'vocations crisis' is, rather, one of the many fruits of the Second Vatican Council."
For once, I think I have to agree with Card. Mahony.
And perhaps it was not an unintended consequence, but was created by design.
I never compared Mahony, even my pea brain knows how to spell it correctly, as a person to Padre Pio. My little pea brain knows about St. Augustine, St. Francis of Assisi, St Francis de Sales, Summa Theologica and the Donatists while your vacuous cranium denies a tenet of the Catholic faith and embraces heresy. Once again you wrote I've have heard that the Sacraments are valid even when the priest is not the most holy person. Personally, I have a difficult time believing this. You are ignorant and your faith is shallow and perhaps even nonexistent. You can think whatever you want but ask that priest after Mass next Sunday about the efficacy of the Sacraments being dependent upon the worthiness of the priest. Once he answers call him a pea brain too, you cretin.
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.