Holy Church doesn’t promulgate laws about censures simply for the heck of it. There is long experience behind censures. Laws have theological grounding.
The tougher censures are applied when the matter concerns something closer to the heart of who and what the Church is.
This is why the story I posted last night about the CDF confirming the excommunication of those involved in the attempted ordination of a woman. Also, the CDF confirmed the excommunication of those involved in a rebel parish in St. Louis.
Now read this story from Victoria, Canada:
B.C. Catholic group ordains woman, married man
Katie DeRosa
Canwest News ServiceThursday, May 29, 2008
VICTORIA – The Roman Catholic Womenpriests Movement ordained two people, James Lauder of Victoria and Monica Kilburn-Smith of Calgary, as priests [Nooo… they didn’t….] Thursday at St. Aidan’s United Church in Victoria.
Lauder, who is married, is the first man ever ordained by Womenpriests. [What a distinction!]
"The movement, on purpose, chooses to break an unjust law that discriminates against women," said the group’s spokesman Francois Brassard. While the group can ordain someone as a priest, the Roman Catholic Church does not legally recognize the appointment, he
said.[Lot’s of confusion here. First, what you find in Canon Law about ordination of men only, is not arbitrary. This is divine law, which the Church knows to be infallibly taught. It is impossible to ordain a woman because it is contrary to God’s will. That is why there is a law. The law is not just some arbitrary invention. It reflects a deeper theological reality. So, their bluster about "unjust" and "legally" and "appointment" (and that is not what an ordination is) seriously misses the mark.]
Once ordained, the individual can hold mass and practise the sacraments in small-faith communities outside the official walls of the church, he added. [No they can’t. They can’t celebrate Mass because the are not priests.] Brassard calls it a "new way of doing priestly ministry among the marginalized." ["A new way of doing priestly minsitry". Okay… look at that carefully. Above, the spokesman called this an "appointment". I am pretty sure that what we have here is a view of priesthood much like that the Eduard Schillebeeckx: the community calls forth people who best represent them, and effectively appoint them as their priest for however long necessary. This undermines the sacramental understanding of priesthood, the ontological reality, what happens in the soul of the one ordained. This reduces priesthood to a function. Secondly, this statement smacks of a Marxist approach, which very often informs feminist views of the Church.]
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, excommunicated a group of women, called the Danube Seven, after they were ordained [No.] in Europe in 2002. The group has ordained [No.] more than 50 women and has more candidates in training, said Brassard. Married or gay men, who would not otherwise be accepted as priests in the church, can also be ordained [No.] under the movement.
"I think we offer a sense of hope for those who do feel disenfranchised," said Lauder. [And, while lying to them, lead them toward the eternal torments of hell.]
The group’s aim is not political mudslinging against the church, [B as in B. S as in S. I would wager there are strong Marxist tendencies amongst these people. But, their thought is so shallow as to focus on the word "political", which they think is a :abd word". Therefore, they claim they are not "political".] but sending a message of inclusively and equality, he said.
The group will participate in the Catholic Network for Women’s Equality’s national conference – held for the first time in British Columbia – today and Saturday at the University of Victoria. [They can read together the CDF decree!] Conference co-ordinator Michele Birch-Conery, herself the first female Roman Catholic priest [No.] in Canada, said she hopes it will raise interest in creating a B.C. chapter for the network.
Be sure to check Edward Peter’s blog for more on the juridical details of the CDF’s decree.
Loading ...
New and Improved! Now with excommunications latae sententiae!
Seriously, we do need to pray for their souls.
This is just another game. A man cannot be ordained by someone not ordained (because they’re a woman or otherwise). He’s an attempt by an attempt, that’s all. A big flop and a non-event.
Don’t you see that this is a retort to the wording of the Vatican’s rulings that’s designed to puzzle people and undermine the authority of the Church?? Haven’t we all seen these games many times before?? We’re playing the “test case” game again. Yawn. OK, so today’s learning is that evil can become incontrovertibly tangled up and treacherous because of all the nasty little paths it spawns. Is that really news to anybody here? Really?
Enough. Send them back to some special Jr High for the incorrigible & aged and be done with it. Let them have a conversation with the VAtican if/when they ever want to repent.
Father Z,
Was the “ordaining” bishop in apostolic succession?
If so, it appears that there was at least one ordination.
This is very sad. Holy Orders is not simply a career choice open to everyone. It is an ecclesial calling. The proper emphasis in the West on individual vocation has been distorted into a radical form of individualism.
Prayers for all involved in this embarrassing and schismatic nonsense.
In ICXC,
Gordo
Don’t forget to tune into EWTN at 11 A.M. eastern, 8 pacific.
I am just glad that Rome is standing up to this sillyness. The media
seems to be enjoying the it. Let’s pray the silly times are passing! Bod bless! Padre Steve
You can if you listen carefully hear the HISS. Same old apple same old snake. Only this time the promise of been an Alter Christus.
This happened in my Diocese. The International Woman Priests movement (or whatever its called) was holding a conference at the University of Victoria.
To know why it happened in Victoria too you need to know the history of this diocese, which involves race horses and so on and so forth. Needless to say, this Diocese used to be the bedrock of heterodoxy in Canada.
However, thankfully, things have been REALLY turning around. To my knowledge, the “Bishop” who ordained the two “priests” is a female “bishop”. Try and get around that one!!! Ugh.
Anyways, be assured that what has happened, though used to be policy of our old Bishop (to see women priests) this is no longer the case. What used to be the prominant group in the Diocese is now a fringe group attempting to have some stay of power. It is unfortunate to say the least.
This happened in my Diocese. The International Woman Priests movement (or whatever its called) was holding a conference at the University of Victoria.
To know why it happened in Victoria too you need to know the history of this diocese, which involves race horses and so on and so forth. Needless to say, this Diocese used to be the bedrock of heterodoxy in Canada.
However, thankfully, things have been REALLY turning around. To my knowledge, the \”Bishop\” who ordained the two \”priests\” is a female \”bishop\”. Try and get around that one!!! Ugh.
Anyways, be assured that what has happened, though used to be policy of our old Bishop (to see women priests) this is no longer the case. What used to be the prominant group in the Diocese is now a fringe group attempting to have some stay of power. It is unfortunate to say the least.
No Gordo, this man was ordained by a woman. And the woman cannot be a “bishopess”. So, the ordination of that man is obviously invalid too.
This reminds me of a question I had:
When Arch. Milingo consecrated 4 men (some married) as bishops, the Holy See declared the ordinations invalid and not just illicit. Does anyone know on what grounds this was done?
Thanks
As the original Victoria said
We are not amused
Oh…it is kind of amusing, in an off-center kind of way.
Group of self-absorbed (it’s about ME!!!!!) grown-ups playing out their sad, decaying, self-indulgent
lives with fellow travellers/co-dependents.
Pray for them and their souls.
Why should we expect the decision of the Holy Office and the threat of excommunication to have effect these people? These groups who give no care for doctrine and mock the Holy Sacraments are the same ones who oppose the “authoritatarian” and “undemocratic” hierarchy, see the Papacy as oppressive and excommunications as a leftover from those evils days of the middle ages. They do not fear the fires of Hell because to them Hell is something the tyrannical clergy devised in medivael times to scare the ignorant peasants into line. Has anyone read the tenets of Call to Action? The Church they desire is one where anyone can believe whatever they want, do whatever they please, and which is run in the same manner as a corporation.
Suffice to say, they do not see themselves as servants of God; to them God is something to harnessed as a means of gaining power and influence. Thats what these people think about- power.
Nothing amusing about watching people succumbing to the temptations of vanity and pride. Bryan is right – pray for them and their souls that they may see the error of their ways and repent their sins before they lead others astray.
If this man’s description of “ordination” is indicative of the movement then they are moving toward theological ground which might further harm their ability to produce valid sacraments. Besides the obviously invalid minister (the “bishopess”) if the person doing the “ordaining” has a different understanding of what they are trying to confer then their intention is not valid and neither is the sacrament. This is the line of logic used (as I understand it) to show that Anglican orders are no longer valid. Through a period of time in the Anglican Church (ecclesial community, I suppose) when the ordinal was changed to reflect a different notion of the priesthood, apostolic succession was lost. I believe the same either is already the case with those drawn to the “womenpriests” movement or will be soon enough.
It appears the “womenpriests” have “rejected” their excommunication:
http://www.romancatholicwomenpriests.org/pressrelease4.htm
Apparently they are “obeying” Christ by disobeying His Vicar on Earth!
Sound logic there! I think I shall “reject” the laws of gravity today, Father Z, and float home from work!
Dear Father Z
Would it not be more practical for you to send your comments to the website in question?
I hate to say it, but the Times Colonist (the Newspaper that’s published in) is pretty liberal and doesn’t really care about balance and truth.
Dear PAtrick,
I imagine the ordinations you mention were not permitted by the pope.
Jonathan,
It is necessary for them to tell the people engaged in this nonsense that they are mortally sinning in a way that separates them from God and the Church.
And it’s also very important to let innocent people know that these things are not admissable, and to let us know that they’re paying attention and we are being cared for.
But even more than either of those, it’s necessary to stick up for the truth and tradition because, believe it or not, it matters. These things are not arbitrary–not at all. Without ordination done properly and faithfully, without deceit and disobedience, where is the Church?
These similated ordinations would be laughable if it was simply a desperate attempt by a fringe group. Unfortunately, the same heresies that these groups espouse constitute the dominant perspective among theologians — um, the same ones that are infecting our young adults with this bunk. The womenpriest types might be old, but they still have a lot of power, and this is where the danger lies.
I often wonder why in the world these people try to “stay” in the Church? It’s pretty clear they disagree with just about everything the Church teaches. Why in the world do they want to be a part of something they dislike so much? Wouldn’t it just be easier to go and “do your own thing?”
It seems like there are enough people of that mindset to form their own group. Why live a bitter life fighting something so big when you can just do the Burger King theology route by leaving and “have it your way.”
I just blogged about this issue. It’s one I feel very strongly about because I can see the obvious rebellious spirit which fuels such acts. What amazed me was the comment from Womenpriests’ website:
Roman Catholic Womenpriests are loyal members of the church who stand in the prophetic tradition of holy disobedience to an unjust law that discriminates against women.
I strongly disagree with the premise that these women look to themselves as being loyal members of the church. If they were loyal, they wouldn’t be fooling with false ordinations to begin with. They speak of “holy disobdience” which in turn raises the question – what is holy obedience? And can disobedience ever be holy? (Also – they should get it right on St. Joan of Arc. She never sought ordination and her “disobedience” was not as much against something as it was in a refusal to deny the reality of “the voices.” St. Joan is one of my favorites and I resent this group distorting history for their own self-serving agenda.)
My answer is no, disobedience is never holy nor was it ever presented as such in both Holy Scripture and in the history of the Church. Disobedience had one response – judgment. In its largest sense, it applies to all of humankind with original sin. In a large sense, it relates to our acceptance (or not) of Vatican decrees.
The ordination of women is not a political issue. The ramifications of men answering the call to this vocation are deep and profound, including areas of headship and authority within the government of the Church – both of which were not given to women.
So the louder these women yell, the more obvious it is to all who controls them. They are a disgrace to God’s purpose for women and it both saddens and frustrates.
Just a post to say I agree with Mary Rose above. I thought this nonsense had stopped. The “ordination” of women is against the teaching of the Catholic Church – FULL STOP. The Church has plenty of wonderful women saints, some of them doctors of the Church; surely they are sufficient for us to revere as examples of womanhood.
Hoka [a woman]
By the way, the website quotes a seeming majority in favor of ordaining women as priests by saying this:
Since 70% of U.S. Catholics favor women’s ordination and a growing majority of Catholics worldwide also favors women’s ordination, we do not “receive” or accept the Church’s prohibition against the ordination of women and the church’s continued reliance on sexist metaphors, beliefs and assumptions for denying ordination to women.
They are trying to use that number as reason for this:
The Catholic Church teaches that a teaching or law of the church is authoritative only if it is “received” by the sensus fidelium, the community of faith. If the community of faith does not accept the law, it has no effect on us. All people have a moral obligation to disobey an unjust law.
Guess what? The number is bogus. I did a search to see how they arrived at the “70%” and found it was from an article in The Boston Globe. Surprise, surprise. 70% of those polled in Boston, not throughout the whole United States.
I very rarely pay attention to polls. The minute someone starts saying “Well, 80% agree…” I say, “Whoa. Where’s the data? How did you get 80%?” Numbers can be manipulated too easily to support someone’s position. I think there’s a change in the winds within the U.S. Catholic Church and folks like RCW are getting blown away.
Does anyone know if the the Roman Catholic priests who were “con celebrating mass” at these so called “women ordinations” are excommunicated as well? I know one priest personally who did this back in 2006 and he prides himself for doing things like this. He has supposedly left the priesthood but his diocese says he doesn’t function as a priest in their diocese but still is hired in diocese and dioceses around the country to do “liturgical renovations” of parishes. This same preist co founded a church down in San Diego with a women priestess.
Mary Rose:
I agree with you regarding supposed statistics. I am in Canada and get tired of hearing the media make statements like “Such and such percentage of Catholics no longer believe this or that.” WHICH Catholics are they asking? Our diocese alone supposedly has 300,000 known Catholics, only 50,000 of whom are practicing. When they do one of their polls, I doubt they ask the participants whether or not they are catechism carrying, Pope loving, Magisterium following Catholics. Many of them were baptized only and still call themselves Catholics for the sake of answering the question when asked about their “religion”. Newspapers and television stations should use their common sense to remind themselves that if a “Catholic” no longer practices, he obviously has issues and probably isn’t the best one to ask to represent the Catholic faithful!
Jess:
The Good News is that the Host is incorruptible, Deo gratias.
Mary Rose:
Great post! I agree: no such thing as “holy disobedience,” at least not towards the Church.
Prof. Basto,
Thanks for that little “detail”… :-) I missed that in the report.
So no one was basically ordained.
Gordo
Roman,
Joan Chittister said it best. They stay because the Catholic church has the copy machine.
In other words, if they simply leave they lose their power, and they can’t replicate the damage. They simply become secular miscontents. Big deal.
Yes, Mr. Ayre has it right. Here in Victoria there are a few aged hippies desperately clinging to the myth of the “spirit of Vatican II”. Somehow it seems fitting that the bishop who did the most damage and allowed heterodoxy to spread in our Diocese, i.e., Bishop Remi De Roo, is now presiding at puppet liturgies. He allowed himself to become the puppet of misguided laymen and women who persuaded him to invest Diocesan money in race horses and land deals contrary to the canons. This brash act on “Catholic soil” is a last gasp from aged hippies railing against Mother Church. Our current Bishop is, by contrast, a Catholic. At the inaugural prolife “Walk for Women’s Lives”, held recently and taken to the legislature steps, our Bishop led the march and spoke the truth without compromise. Without a doubt, he will look after us. We should pray for him that he is protected from harm and filled with wisdom. As for the group known as WomenPriests, they are not known for listening to reason. The recent Vatican Decree will help our Bishop bring the full force of the Church’s teaching to bear on those who would attempt to coerce others to follow their revisionist and anti-authority agenda. And, for our part, we have to write the media and combat the misinformation spread by the heretics.
Mike,
I’d stay away from him if I were you. Some priests like this can be very dangerous men.
I’d also say that he’s at least in big, deep trouble with the Church if he founded a parish with “priestesses.” I’m trying to figure out how he wouldn’t be covered under this, but barring knowing details, no one is probably going to be able to tell you for sure.
WARNING: The following content could cause serious fits of laughter.
http://www.virtuelle-dioezese.de/photos.php
http://www.romancatholicwomenpriests.org/photo_gallery.htm
Prof. Basto refers to the “ordaining prelate” as a “bishopess”.
Really? Surely she was a bishopette! And if you get about twenty of them they can perform on Broadway!
I forget which newspaper it was (someone can probably help me remember this), but one of them had an online survey to find out how Catholics and others felt about ordaining women. One of the questions read, “I believe women should be ordained as: A) Priests, B) Deacons.” You couldn’t move on without answering the question, so 100% of people who submitted answers would have had to support ordination of women. Ridiculous.
I as a woman can no more become a priest than I can become a duck. It’s like trying to consecrate Oreos and Sprite. It just doesn’t work that way.
One other question, now that I think about it: Isn’t concelebration an integral part of the rite of ordination, even “attempted” ordination? If so, wouldn’t all women who attempted to be ordained immediately thereafter attempt to consecrate the Eucharist, thereby incurring latae sententiae excommunication?
“You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.” – Inigo Montoya