It Was Us Against Them: Does Mahony Want A Priestless Church?

Los Angeles Lay Catholic Mission ^ | March, 2001 | Robert Kumpel

[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.

[Antoninus]

Thank you Chief Inquisitor. Oh if I could only have someone of your great holiness to guide me << great sarcasm >> Why don't you mind your own soul and stop casting stones at me and what you "perceive" I believe. You are clueless, rude and unChristian. You don't know the slightest thing about me and have completely misinterpreted what I said.

Your reaction is WAY over the top. Ever heard the expression, "a word to the wise is sufficient"? Smed knows exactly what he's talking about. Your posts were based on your uninformed opinion. He was not calling you a heretic, just cautioning you that you were treading on ground that had been declared heretical 1,600 years ago. And he's right. You owe him an apology.

Let me be the first to say that I have, on occasion, spoken some nonsense from my own uninformed opinion. Comments by folks like Smedley have forced me to research my claims and allowed me to come to a much better understanding of the Catholic faith. Rather than get all huffy and call them "inquisitors", I say thank you.

[Sock]

Smed knows exactly what he's talking about.

That is debateable and I say that from personal experience with him. (Chastity vs Celebacy)

[sitetest]

Dear Sock,

Your argument in post 69 was very nice but somewhat irrelevant.

One doesn't have to be unworthy to not have the proper intent, and one can be unworthy all day long and still have the proper intent.

The question is, can an unworthy minister be a valid minister of the sacraments? To deny that this can be so is to affirm Donatism.

"I freely admit that I am not right about everything, but I am right about you."

Oh gee, Sock, if you call me enough names, accuse me of enough things, you'll wind up having to be right at least some of the time.

"You annoy the he11 out of me and I would prefer if you will never post to me again and I intend to make this my last post to you."

Hey Sock, you initially posted to me here.

So, if you preferred that I wouldn't post to you, you have an ineffective way of pursuing your goal.

But have no fear, I will post to you whenever I think it's called for. I really don't care whether you like that or not.

The difference between my posts to you and your posts to me will be that I will not lower myself to your level of incivility and vulgarity.

You may wish to re-read the Catechism on charity. Start with paragraph 1825.

;-)

sitetest

[sitetest]

Dear Sock,

"That is debateable and I say that from personal experience with him. (Chastity vs Celebacy)"

By the way, sorry to say, I agreed with you on that one.

;-)

sitetest

[Sock]

I don't think you're right about much, but I think you may have a point with this guy.

[nickcarraway]

I only meant those who attacked her, not anyone else. I pinged you to all those threads, but I wasn't necessarily admonishing you.

[nickcarraway]

Good point! You are on the money.

[Antoninus]

You print out her initial comment and take it to a theology professor and ask the professor if Your position is known as the Donatist heresy'' is a fair response to that. Take it to several.

I think it's a fair response and a useful one. In college, one of my best professors (at a Catholic university) gave the class a "true or false" test which listed a number of statements about the nature of Christ, the Holy Spirit, etc. We quickly took the test. All the answers were "false" according to Catholic doctrine and each one reflected an early heresy. As the professor went through the answers, he said, "If you answered 'true' to number 3, that means you're a Monophysite, etc." For the record, I answered "true" to about 3 out of the 10 questions. I didn't take the professor's comments to be "utter BS." I didn't call him an Inquisitor. Instead, I had something of an epiphany.

That test was one of the most important moments for me in terms of the growth of understanding of the Catholic faith. It was eye-opening. If goldenstategirl could have swallowed her pride a bit, she might have had a real learning experience here.

[Sock]

If goldenstategirl could have swallowed her pride a bit, she might have had a real learning experience here

There is a whole lot of pride on this thread.

But, keep on piling on. Maybe she’ll never come back and we’ll be safe from that evil heretic.

[Antoninus]

"IF ONE SHALL SAY, THAT IN MINISTERS, WHILST THEY COMPLETE AND CONFER THE SACRAMENTS, THERE IS NOT REQUIRED THE INTENTION, AT LEAST OF DOING WHAT THE CHURCH DOES, LET HIM BE ACCURSED."

Yeah, and? "Let him be accursed" has nothing to do with whether or not the sacraments are valid. They are, though the priest himself be damned on the day of reckoning.

Take it easy. Save the vitriol for the political arena. If gsg was too thin-skinned to tussle with someone as generally innocuous as SmedleyButler, it's better she leaves FR now before she gets into some real ugly battles. She wouldn't have lasted half a dozen posts on "The Neverending Story."

[sitetest]

Dear Sock,

"I don't think you're right about much, but I think you may have a point with this guy."

LOL.

If you're taking ultima's side, then I know I'm in good shape.

;-)

sitetest

[american colleen]

Wow, am I sorry I posted this thread!

I read your post and I read SB's reply to you (at the time they were posted, not just now). I myself wanted to reply to you with a post about "In Persona Christi Capitis" which I studied last winter when the stories of Geoghan were coming out in disgusting detail. I had the same reaction as you have in your post - outrage, hurt, betrayal. My God! It is almost too much to envision being married or baptized or receiving the Lord's body from hands such as those! How can this be?

That's why I posted St. Francis' words when he was asked about corrupt priests "When it came time for Holy Communion, I would go to receive the Sacred Body of my Lord from the priest's anointed hands."

I took SB's post to you as an opportunity for study, not an insult. I believed he was telling you that the Church had dealt with this same situation centuries ago.

Donatist belief is grounded in the view that only those who morally pure can be members of the church. The Donatists regarded catholic church as compromised because some of its bishops had betrayed their faith during persecution and because it had accepted the support of the Roman authorities.

I hope you will reconsider and continue on at FR. We are all part of the "Catholic Caucus" - and boy, do I depend on each and every one of the members, whether I agree with them 100% of the time or not.

This is all beyond the pale, and it is over something that was misconstrued. And it is mushrooming. And I bet I know who loves this stuff.

[Antoninus]

You’re an self centered egomaniac and a jerk.

For the record, I initially was put off by sitetest too. However, as I read more of his posts, I realized that his points are always concise, well thought-out, and correct in terms of being in line with Church teaching. I also realized that he is a formidable debater and you'd better bring your "A" material if you're going to engage him. I respect his opinion, though I don't always agree with them, and think that threads are generally richer thanks to his postings. He is certainly no jerk.

[Antoninus]

You know, maybe we should start a prayer rosary thread - each one of us can take turns saying a rosary for him. Maybe we can e-mail him and tell him so.

Great idea! If you decide to do that, please count me in. As it is, I'll add him to my own personal prayers. Through the Holy Spirit, no heart is unreachable.

[Sock]

Yeah, and? "Let him be accursed" has nothing to do with whether or not the sacraments are valid.

That in itself doesn't, but check out the link. Intention of the minister is what counts.

If gsg was too thin-skinned to tussle with someone as generally innocuous as SmedleyButler..

He can be and (from what little I’ve read of his) is as abrasive as the best of us.

Look, this (probably young) girl is no more of an heretic than I am. There was a proper way to have corrected her and he didn’t use it. Epikeia…look it up.

[american colleen]

I'm wondering if you inadvertently came up with a really good idea. When you register on FR, and first start posting in the "ghetto," maybe it should be required that you spend two weeks (combat) training on Neverending...

[Sock]

He is certainly no jerk.

By his continualing posting to Sede’s and Schismatics he encourages them to post more and more and more. Their guilt is increased, nothing is gained and there is nothing intelligent about it. I stand by my assessment.

[nickcarraway]

I agree with you about the bullying, but not about Donatism. God has more power than any horrible priest. As to question about the specific actions during a sacrament being improper, you'd have to ask an expert.

[sitetest]

Dear Sock,

"By his continualing posting to Sede’s and Schismatics he encourages them to post more and more and more. Their guilt is increased, nothing is gained and there is nothing intelligent about it."

That's actually a worthwhile criticism of me. A lot better than just hurling profanities, huh?

Too bad you never thought to say it to me directly.

I've thought a lot about precisely what you've said; it's an important question.

sitetest

[ultima ratio]

I think that's a compliment. I'll take any I can get on this site.