CNN interview of Fr. Roy Bourgeois

More on Fr. Roy Bourgeois and the excommunication situation.

There was a CNN piece on 14 December with Fr. Bourgeois and Msgr. Charles Pope.

Father found his collar for the interview.   He has not found a Catholic position on the ordination of women.

If he wasn’t excommunicated before this interview, he should be now.

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in SESSIUNCULA. Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Bryan says:


    Let’s drag out the stock canards and ‘woe is me’.

    Pray for a “Damascus Moment” for Ray. He sorely needs it.

  2. Most Excellent Sledgehammer says:

    How very, very sad…I couldn’t watch it all…got too angry.

  3. Wait a minute… did he just plug National Catholic Reporter at the end of that clip?

  4. David says:

    Could someone please explain why the Maryknolls needed Vatican intervention to deal with this obviously sad situation?!?

  5. Pat says:

    The anchor was also somewhat inaccurate about Father Roy being “kicked out of the Church”. I would assume that a lot of people watching this don’t really know that excommunication is not being “kicked out”, as though one can never come back. The way it was presented made the Church sound cold and cruel, as though it were afraid of Father Roy and just turfed him out on the curb.

  6. Pat says:

    Watching it on CNN, I meant, not on this site.

  7. I tell my confirmation students that if Jesus wanted to ordain a woman He would have ordained his Immaculate Mother. I also remind them that the most honored human person in the Catholic Church is a Woman–Holy Mary.
    We also have three female Doctors of the Church and thousands of female Saints who are all of higher stature in honor than a priest.

    Therefore the accusation of sexism and injustice rings hollow. It springs from nothing more than people deceived by the shallow zeitgeist of our culture.

  8. Mitch says:

    I enjoyed his plug for National Catholic Reporter.

  9. symantic antic says:

    Is it proper to still call him “Fr.” Bourgeois?

    Wouldn’t “Mr.” be more appropriate right now?

  10. Vincent S. says:

    Like Jonathan and Mitch, I was somewhat amused by his mentioning National Catholic Reporter online. But it also makes me wonder – if he made this appearance on CNN to discuss the issue of women’s ordination and had not participated in the pretend-ordinations, would his comments, i.e. his denial of Catholic teaching, be enough to warrant his excommunication? And if so, why is his “Catholic” publication of choice allowed to promote the same views without sanction?

  11. Joan Moore says:

    This poor unfortunate priest reminds me so much of all those pro-abortion people – they have rationalized their positions so much that they just cannot see straight.

    What Fulton Sheen said is so true:

    “The instinct of justice in the human heart is so deep that, even in great deeds of injustice, the villains wear the mantle of justice” Fulton J. Sheen Ph.D. D.D. Life of Christ, page 237.

  12. Denis Crnkovic says:

    How very sad. I wish, though, that Msgr Pope had lined up a more forceful series of arguments. For example, if Jesus chose faithful women to announce His resurrection, why didn\’t he choose them to be priests at the Last Supper? He should also explain the very impossibility of ordaining women more forcefully: you can no sooner ordain a woman as priest than you can ordain a tree as priest. I am often surprised at how the Church\’s position is not presented clearly enough.

    Pray for our priests!

  13. By Father Bourgeois’ logic God has created an intrinsic injustice in the world in the following manner: fathers cannot be mothers; mothers cannot be fathers; men cannot give birth! We must stop this discrimination, this injustice, this sin! What a joke.

    God bless Msgr Charles Pope and the good work he does for the Archdiocese of Washington…and abroad.

    Father Bourgeois makes the claim that if women were priests, the sexual abuse crisis and its cover-up would not exist. That is absurd. In fact, it’s sexist against men to say that women are less likely to hide improprieties, etc.

    Too bad in our society it would be inappropriate to say that men and women were, in fact, created by God for separate roles, separate functions, equal in dignity nonetheless, but designed by the Creator to SERVE (priesthood is service, not a right) in DIFFERENT ways. The natural way that God created men and women should be reflected in society, if we assume that the family is the basic unit of society.

  14. jarhead462 says:

    Man, that was painful……and very sad.

    Semper Fi!

  15. Nathan says:

    Symantic antic: “Is it proper to still call him “Fr.” Bourgeois?”

    Canon lawyer Ed Peters has a good post on this issue: Mr. Peters says that excommunication is not the same as removal from the clerical state, and that as of now, Fr. Bourgeois remains a priest. Apparently, the excommunication is a first step, and one that is easy to lift should Fr. Bourgeois recant his erroneous statements. If he is removed from the clerical state, however, it would be much more difficult for him to return should he recant.

    I think it is an application of the spiritual acts of mercy to admonish the sinner and give him every opportunity to reconcile with the Church prior to a full “lowering of the boom.”

    In Christ,

  16. This sad priest is emotionally immature (and it shows). He has taken up a “cause” and behind that there often lurks another problem.

    I had my own experience of this kind of thing some years ago when I argued in the pages of a Catholic Journal with a well-known priest who was advocating and end to the celibacy obligation. I was criticised for “lacking understanding” and he was presented to me as someone who needed compassion etc. I duly fell for this and wrote him a letter of apology – not for upholding celibacy but in case I had offended him. What happened next was that he was photographed by a journalist escaping through his study window because it had been discovered that he had a girlfriend in his university classes.

    There is more here than meets the eye.

  17. Alessandro says:

    The sad thing is that, unfortunately, many priests and lay people nowadays hold the same ideas as fr Bourgeois. He is explicit and pubblic, so he has been excommunicated, others are more delicate, but they continually try to undermine (unnoticed) the church confidence in the official magisterium. Heresy is more dangerous when hidden than when exposed.

  18. Joe says:

    Excommunication cannot be grounds for automatic removal from Maryknoll. As I understand it, the one excommunicated would have to ask to depart from the society, the CDF would have to be given faculties from the Holy Father to expel him immediately from the society (unless they have this faculty habitually, I don’t know), or there would have to be a pattern of his disobedience of superiors to justify them beginning the process of removing him. I am not a canonist (if you are one feel free to correct me if I am wrong!), but this is how I understand it from conversations with some. We must also remember that excommunication is medicinal not penal, therefore the Church still has hope that he will recant, repent, and return to the normal life of a priest and member of Maryknoll.

  19. Michael Fudge says:

    Here is the transcript for those who do not want to watch the video:

    HOLMES: Well, a priest in Georgia is bracing to be kicked out of the church, to be excommunicated. The Vatican has put him on notice, he’s just waiting for official word really right now. The reason? He supports the ordination of women priests. In our “Faces of Faith” this morning, feeling back the debate on this emotional topic. And with me now, in the studio, Father Roy Bourgeois. He supports the move as I just mentioned and also joining us this morning from Washington, the Pope, Monsignor Charles Pope with us this morning. Good morning. Thank you both gentlemen for being here. I’ll start with you, Father Bourgeois, you got notice a while back that gave you 30 days, essentially saying you’d be excommunicated. What’s the status there? Has it happened officially yet?

    FATHER ROY BOURGEOIS, PRIEST OF 36 YEARS: No, it hasn’t. Really the core of the issue is this, I do believe that our god calls women as well as men to be, to the priesthood. I’ve been a priest for 36 years. I have met many devout Catholic women, who like me, feel called to the priesthood. When I was a young man in the military, 36 years ago, I felt god was calling me. God is the source of all life. God has created men and women of equal stature and dignity. And I believe as many Catholics and many clergy, that women as well as men, are called to the priesthood. That invitation comes from god, who are we as men to say that our call is valid, but the call of women is invalid?

    HOLMES: Monsignor, well, Monsignor Pope, you help us here. And a lot of people are familiar at least with the church doctrine, that says that women should not. It’s the official stance of the church that women should not be ordained priests, but take it a little further if you can. I know you can’t give me the whole history here so quickly. But still, the logic and the basis for it. Why should women not be allowed to serve?

    MONSIGNOR CHARLES POPE, ARCHDIOCESE OF WASHINGTON, D.C.: Well recent popes, including John Paul VI and John Paul II, have both stated that the church has no authority, whatsoever, to confer ordination, priestly ordination on women. And the reason is rooted in the church’s understanding of the foundation of the priesthood, which was the call of the apostles. And that Jesus called 12 men. Although he broke many conventions of his time, you know, in regards to the treatment of women, he did not summon women to be apostles. And therefore, what people are asking the church to do is something that the church has no authority to do. We can’t just start ripping pages out of scripture. Or saying, well, if Jesus had talked to us moderns, we could have done it differently so we’re going to update things.

    HOLMES: Now, go ahead.

    BOURGEOIS: This is about the call, about choosing men – very, very, the core of our faith in the Catholic tradition is the resurrection, as Christians. Jesus appeared first to women after the crucifixion. To announce his resurrection, to Mary Magdalene and all the women, to bring – they were chosen. Jesus chose women to go to the men, who were in hiding behind locked doors, to bring the message of the resurrection. So when we talk about being chosen – we also must include women.

    HOLMES: Now Monsignor, what about that? Monsignor Pope, what about that point? And also, is it possible, I’m sure over time things have changed in the church from tradition. So is it possible the church is wrong and maybe we will see a change eventually?

    POPE: No, we’re not going to see a change. Pope John Paul is very clear that this position of the church regarding the call of the apostles as being the origin of the sacrament of Holy Orders, is, is a definitive teaching, that is to be definitively held by all the faithful. It will not change. This is not something which has ever changed in the church. Cultures have come and gone, times have come and gone. But the church has remained very consistent. And not just the Roman Catholic Church, but all the Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Rite Church as well. This is a very consistent teaching.

    HOLMES: Well, father, let me ask you this though. I mean, yes, you could have this opinion. And why not go and fight and push for it behind the scenes. And not come out officially against the church? Do you have to –

    BOURGEOIS: My conscience and my god, is compelling me.

    HOLMES: Well, can’t you –

    BOURGEOIS: Let me say this at the very core of this issue is sexism, sexism. And sexism, like racism, is a sin. No matter how hard our patriarchy, we as men, try to justify discrimination. In the end, it is always wrong. The Catholic Church today is going through a serious crisis. I just came back from New Orleans. 32 churches are closing in New Orleans. Wherever I travel, Catholic Churches are closing, because of a priest shortage. We have hundreds of women who are saying, god is calling them to be priests. Why not allow women like men, to be priests? Also very important, very important is this issue of the sexual abuse scandal that I, it hurts me to bring this up. However, if we had women priests, there would never have been those years of silence while thousands of clergy abused thousands of children.

    HOLMES: Monsignor Pope, I’m going to give you the last word to address a couple of those issues. Is it fair to look at it, almost as a social issue? As an issue of sexism, as he just brought up? Or is this something that is separate, and you can’t really put it in that same vacuum, as the social issue, as an issue of sexism?

    POPE: The church has always had great respect for women. There’s women in great leadership roles all throughout the church. Our chancellor is a woman in this diocese. I have many women leaders in my parish but what Father is asking the church to do is something that we can not do. This is something that we received from Jesus Christ. Now I want to also respond, T.J., to the point you made. Which was that a father has a right to his conscience. But he does not as a priest, have a right to draw the faithful and to attend simulated ordinations and confuse the faithful. His role as priest is to speak that which befits the doctrine of the church. He should speak privately to his superiors, and spiritual director. But he should not involve the faithful in his own struggle of conscience or make accusations to the church on sexism.

    HOLMES: I know –

    BOURGEOIS: This is very important. For more information, our viewers should go to and I said this on Vatican Radio and I will say it on CNN. There will never be justice in the Catholic Church until women are ordained.

    HOLMES: Well I am going to have to leave it there. Gentlemen, this is a debate that will continue. I am glad, so glad both of you could be here. And Father Roy Bourgeois and also Monsignor Pope there in Washington. Really, I wish we had more time. We could talk about this all morning. But gentlemen, thank you so much for the conversation.

    BOURGEOIS: Thank you.

  20. LRThunder says:

    I am praying that he repents of his positions and returns to full communion with the Church.

    However, I had to stop watching the video when he started using the “sexism” card. It has nothing to do with sexism, and he of all people should know that.

  21. Andrew, UK and sometimes Canada says:

    Perhaps some Liberation theology might be carefully applied here. Removing “Bourgeois” thoughts from the Holy Church.

  22. TNCath says:

    This may be a dumb question but, if he is excommunicated, is he still canonically bound to the Jesuits? Conversely, are the Jesuits canonically bound to continue to provide support as a religious, i.e. a place to live, food, health insurance, etc?

  23. RBrown says:

    Why am I not surprised that Fr Bourgeois is Maryknoll?

    Two points:

    First, Fr Bourgeois’ understanding of vocation is inadequate simply because it defines vocation as something subjective–an interior desire for the priesthood (or religious life). In fact, the calling is from the Church, Whose Head is Christ, the Second Person of the Trinity. And so vocation is BOTH subjective (an interior desire) and the external acceptance and ordination by the Church (objective).

    Thus, it makes no difference how strong someone’s attraction is to the priesthood, unless there is ordination (which is impossible with women), there is NO VOCATION.

    Second, Fr Bourgeois makes the argument that the announcement of the Resurrection was first to women. Although this is true, it is not relevant to the question of whether a woman can be ordained: A priest is primarily one who enters the sanctuary to offer the sacrifice.

    The gift of prophecy can be given to men and women. It is no indication of a priestly vocation.

  24. Bonifacius says:


    I can’t answer your question, but Fr. Bourgeois is from Maryknoll, not from the Jesuits.

  25. Pseudomodo says:

    If Fr. Ray held this position in his formation and ordination as a priest is this grounds for a declaration of nullity of his ordination? If his understanding of ordination is and was marred in this way, can his ordination be anulled?

  26. adam says:

    Is this man not in mortal peril of loosing Heaven and gaining Hell?

  27. Ken says:

    Coincidently, it was one year ago this week that Monsignor Pope was on the cover of U.S. News and World Report, saying a traditional Missa Solemnis at Saint Mary’s in Washington, D.C. during Advent:

    We are winning.

  28. Tom Seaver says:

    My conscience tells me that it is okay to wrap the head of people like Father Bourgeois in duct tape so they cannot spew their incorrect positions about the Catholic Church. That does not make it right, so I do not do it. I wish this man had the same decency.

  29. Maureen says:

    If God wanted women to be ordained, wouldn’t He have arranged for the Bible to say, “And then Jesus said, [insert amazing statement here]”? I think so. He was pretty clear about divorce bad, slavery bad, et al.

    If people seriously think that God isn’t powerful enough to make sure that His intentions for the Church were clear, and would remain in the Bible — then their opinion should clearly be that God is a big ol’ wimpy weenie and there’s no point paying any attention to Him, much less worrying about who does what in church. If the whole thing’s meaningless and fallible, and God is not omnipotent, you can just stay home on Sunday morning and no harm done. Why would you fight for the right of women to waste their time worshipping a powerless God and being pastor to a playbaby congregation?

    Or you could believe that God is in fact powerful enough to set things up the way He wants them.

  30. Calleva says:

    The pro-female ordination camp frequently says that Jesus, living in the 1st century, could not be so radical as to promote women priests. However, there is a precedent in the classical world: the Romans had priestesses. Jesus would have been quite aware of this, and he would have appointed women as apostles had he wished. The Early Church did not discern a mandate for women priests either. So we think we know better?

    I always feel this argument trumps the sexist charge. Christ’s first appearing to the women after the Resurrection shows what honour women have in the Church, but in no way does it form an argument for ordaining women.

    I think the comment about Fr Bourgeois having an underlying immaturity is very perceptive. As a Catholic it’s a shame he doesn’t ‘get it’ about Truth and Authority. If the Church has no Authority, then we might as well give up and go off and become Unitarians or Muggletonians or whatever.

  31. BCatholic says:

    Father Ray never says anything about Catholic theology. He only does sociology. How sad.

  32. Joe says:

    yes the man is still a priest, but the question of whether to call him ‘Father’ is slightly different. I don’t think there is any canonical right to that title; it is a matter of custom and usage. It has two aspects that I can see. One is common courtesy and politeness, so I can call (for example) a High Anglican ‘Father’ if he chooses that title even if I don’t recognize him as a valid priest. The other is spiritual. As I understand it, historically the title ‘Father’ was used of monks who provided spiritual counsel, including non-priests, and become slowly attributed to all priests (and in some traditions all clerics). In French a Secular priest is called Monsieur le Cure (from the same source as our Curate), but a Religious Priest is called Monsieur l’Abbe (similar to Abbot, from Aramaic Father). I imagine that curial officials – and the Holy Father for that matter – would probably address him as Father, so I would do so myself, but understanding that I was only being polite. He would in no way be a spiritual father to me.

  33. Peggy says:

    Our pastor used the Feast of the Immaculate Conception–the feast day of our parish–to “admit” to the Church’s “bad record” on “discrimination against women.” Uggghhh!! As one poster noted, the most honored human person in the Church is Mary our Mother and the Mother of God. The pastor even stepped to the side to distribute Our Lord so the elderly female EMHC’s could deliver from the center, in the priest’s rightful place. Arrgggg…I always go to the priest.

    I will refrain from discussing the priest’s getting into amnesty on the feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe. Sigh.

  34. Christopher says:

    Thanks for the video Father-

    Msgr. Pope who was the celebrant for the Mount St. Marys Solemn High Mass

    and heretic Roy – He instructs people to visit the National Catholic Reporter website. Why isnt this enough to get NCR to remove the word Catholic from their title?

  35. RichR says:

    So, is the NCR publicly endorsing this man and his views on the ordination of women? If they are not, then a swift condemnation of Fr. Bourgeois is in order. To remain silent in such a public display of dissent is equal to consent. Either way, the NCR will show its true colors.

  36. John 6:54 says:

    Lets see, I want to give birth, oh wait God made me a man, my role is not to give birth but to be a Father!

    My conscienous tells me to slap Fr. Bourgeois, oh wait if thats what my conscienous is telling me it must be poorly formed.

  37. Charivari Rob says:

    I do like the way Msgr. Pope drew a clear line about Father B.’s responsibility to not mislead the Faithful.

    Tom Seaver – “My conscience tells me that it is okay to wrap the head of people like Father Bourgeois in duct tape so they cannot spew their incorrect positions about the Catholic Church. That does not make it right, so I do not do it.”

    Are you sure you’re not feeling a calling to wrap him in duct tape that your (formed and informed) conscience tells you would be wrong?

    BTW, I was there the day you won your 300th game. I still think you’re one of the greatest pitchers there ever was. ;^)

  38. What a dirty trick by this sad, pathetic man to bring up the sex abuse scandal as if it somehow would have been avoided had their been women priests. This is a manipulative man who knows what to bring up to score points with those already sympathetic towards his lying cause. His theology had no substance, it made no sense for him to bring up the appearance of the risen Christ to the women, since the appearance of the risen Christ is not a prerequisite for priesthood. If anyone had half a brain they would realize that all the points he brings up AFFIRMS THE MALE PRIESTHOOD! Jesus did all these things affirming the dignity of women, did everything outside of societal norm in relation to women, honored the dignity of women as equal to that of men – and in that equality of dignity still only called men to be Apostles, the very foundation of the priesthood!

    As Jesus’ Mother would have said, OY VEY!

  39. Matt Q says:

    He digs his hole deeper and deeper.

    It’s obvious his pride has so hardened his heart he no longer cares for his priesthood, Church, or the rest of us for that matter. Yes, a “Damascus Moment” is needed–as we all have something in our lives in which needs such a conversion, hopefully gentle than dramatic, but our Heavenly Father knows us better than we do.

  40. Tina in Ashburn says:

    Msgr Pope does an excellent job defining what the Church teaches in the short time allowed. It was impossible to present all the cogent arguments that make Fr Bourgeois’ position untenable.

    Fr Bourgeois is indeed confused [and destructive].

    Accusations that the Church mistreats women is ridiculous. Compare how woman are treated in Christian-based cultures/countries and in non-Christian. Christianity/Catholicism has done more for women than any other influence.

    Complaining about mistreatment of women only furthers the confusion about gender roles and the different things for which men and women are meant. I think in my biology class for instance, I learned that male and female have different physiologies. Until women grow, uh, certain male parts, I think that pretty much settles this whole ordination question. :-)

    Announcing the resurrection is not the same as the power to confect the Eucharist. How does Fr B imagine these two arguments are related?

    I wonder with others here what might be amiss other than just church law and ‘justice’. How many situations like this have arisen from personal agendas? Henry VIII wanted an annulment, the Orthodox wanted recognition of second marriages, so many personal acquaintances of mine are non-practicing Catholics because of irregular marriages/relationships, either of their own or that of parents. How many teenagers discredit the authority of their parents when in the grips of resentment over being correctly forbidden to do something?

    Yawn. Same ole’, same ole. [Too bad this is so destructive though]

  41. Geoffrey says:

    God bless Msgr. Pope! God help Fr. Roy!

    Am I correct in believing that it is heresy for a baptised Christian to believe in the “ordination” of women, and that all such supporters are heretics? Why aren’t these terms used when applicable?

  42. JimR says:

    By the way this is the same Msgr. Pope who celebrated the Solemn High Mass on the Feast of the Immaculate Conception at Mount St. Marys.

  43. If Our Lord were going to call women to the priesthood, I would think his first call would be to the holiest woman of that time and now, HIS MAMMA!

  44. John Enright says:

    This is sad.

  45. Romulus says:

    The pro-female ordination camp frequently says that Jesus, living in the 1st century, could not be so radical as to promote women priests.

    The timing of the Incarnation was not some fluky accident beyond God’s control.

  46. Kazimer says:

    Fr. Roy Bourgeois’ participation in this CNN interview is his fait accompli.

  47. Edward C. says:

    Ok, something’s been bothering me a lot about this whole “women’s ordination” thing. What ever happened to the nuns?? I personally think that were our Church to bring up and promote holy and devout vocations to the religious life, this problem would cease to exist. Nun’s have extraordinary influence in our Church. Who TAUGHT most of these priests what they know about God and Church? I think it really sad that women in search of misguided service disregard the religious life. I say we start a more devout and holy, a righteous campaign to promote and express respect for women religious. Give them honor and respect for their service, nurture young women and promote vocations to the religious life!

    Pray for nuns! Pray that they hold true to their holy vocations and nurture and teach the faithful. Help them help us!

  48. Joeph Ravago says:

    I think “Fr” Bourgeois is suffering from the sin of pride because he focuses that is the calling and the belief and desire of the individual rather than the desire of God. I think he also forgot about his vow to be obedient to local ordinary who has most likely him ordered him to stop. He serves himself rather than God and His instituted Church.

  49. Chironomo says:

    Edward C….

    I totally agree…. the problem is that the religious life has been marginalized, and the only important function within the “power structure” is that of the priest (and eventually Pastor, and eventually Bishop, and eventually Pope… etc…). In the progressives mind, a Nun is not on the track to be promoted to a position of power in the hierarchy. This is what it’s all about. The stuff about being called to service, etc… is nonsense. How do these women know they aren’t being called to be nuns? They claim to have a “vocation” where there cannot be one.

  50. TNCath says:

    So sorry. Yes, Maryknoll, not the Jesuits. I still wonder if Maryknoll has any obligations to one of its members that happens to get excommunicated.

  51. Edward C. says:

    Chironomo: “the problem is that the religious life has been marginalized, and the only important function within the “power structure” is that of the priest (and eventually Pastor, and eventually Bishop, and eventually Pope… etc…). In the progressives mind, a Nun is not on the track to be promoted to a position of power in the hierarchy. This is what it’s all about. ”

    Amen. What I really don’t get is how POWER ever took precedence over SERVICE. When did God ever say “you will be judged by how many people you control?” And here I was thinking that my personal call to the priesthood was to SERVE the people of God and bring them closer to Christ that their souls might be saved. I didn’t wake up one day and say “I love my God and Church, I want to help control it and gain influence and power in the hierarchy… I think I’m called by God to be a priest!”

    It’s time we take notice of the SERVICE given by our holy priests and religious (both male and female) both in “power positions” and out. Influence and power are not the goal, the pope is not the pope because he desires to be the greatest and highest ranking man in the Catholic world. He is pope because he is Called by God to SERVE God’s people, he is the servant king bending down to wash the feet of his flock. HUMBLE THYSELF.

  52. Stu says:

    Just a story about the Maryknolls. We bought our children some old Catholic magazines called Crusade that the Maryknolls published in the 50s. Good, solid, orthodox stuff. We were missing some so we called the Maryknoll to see if they were going to do a reprint. The lady than answered the phone remarked that they get a lot of requests to do so but that they were not inclined because those magazines don’t reflect their theology any longer.


  53. Paladin says:

    Romulus wrote: The timing of the Incarnation was not some fluky accident beyond God’s control.

    Good point! I need to remember that one, when the old “cultural adaptation” canard rises again…

  54. Brendan Peters says:

    Fr Bourgeous is a man of integrity who, like all prophets who speak the truth to power, is being given short shrift by the fearful and ignorant. You cannot chain God’s Holy Spirit who calls women to an equal status within the Church of today.

  55. Pseudomodo says:

    Brenden wrote:

    Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah. Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah. Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah.

    Yeah whatever…

  56. Eensal says:


    Brendan’s empahsis was on the word S-T-A-T-U-S

  57. joy says:

    Why don’t we trade the ‘hundreds’ of wymyn who are ‘called’ to the priesthood to the C of E for the Anglicans who are waiting to cross the Tiber?

  58. Warren says:

    And the millstone award (Luke 17:2) goes to – Mr. Bourgeois. Mr. Bourgeois is getting his 15 minutes of fame; he has his reward. It should now be clear that he is neither Catholic in understanding nor practice. We hope for him to recant his position and return as a faithful priest. It appears, however, that his will is decidely bent against the legitimate authority of Christ’s Church, and that makes him a protestant. Bourgeois boldness is not so much related to the Faith as it is a sign of his “I-know-better-than-the-Magisterium” pride in himself. He should have the decency to admit he is not Catholic and thus go and join the Episcopal Church (TEC).

    Let’s hope that this episode attracts attention to the Marknoll Society itself so that the Church might refine Her ranks a little more. So often, too often, we hear that certain orders or societies are merely breeding grounds for rebellion (marxism, radical feminism, paganism). Would it not be prudent to examine the Marknollers and determine whether or not the Society is truly a Catholic organization and, if found lacking, require reform in order to continue funding?

  59. Thomas says:

    As irritating as these episodes are, they also give me great encouragement.

    If this is the caliber of our enemies, we can’t lose.

  60. Brendan Peters says:

    No Eensal, my Emphasis (not empahsis, as you say)was on equal (not status) as in male and female he made them or in the image of God they were created. So, what are you so afraid of?

  61. Edward C. says:

    “within the Church of today” – Brendan Peters, Now how on earth can anyone move forward with their feet cut off from under them? It’s all good and fun to accuse HH Pope John Paul the Second now JP the Great of being ignorant and fearful…. REALLY? You can have your little “church of today”, I’ll keep my Eternal Church of Christ. Ever ancient, ever new, the same today, as it was in the beginning as it will be in the future. Forgetting the Truth upon which we were built, denying WHO WE ARE is like chopping off your feet before a marathon. Surely, giving into society’s whims is the work of the devil. Remember, as a Church, as followers of Christ, we are called to walk contrary to the world. Look to Christ, read HIS words and leave the modern sentiments of “equality” to the secular, our equality is higher, more noble. We are eternally equal before God, loved equally and immensely. But called to serve in equally different capacities. Nurture respect, foster love, sow seeds of grace, but do not forget who we are and from where we get our Traditions.

  62. kat says:

    The other great publication that the Maryknoll sisters put out was the Treasure Box series for children. I think they were by subscription and every month or so a new installment in the Wupsy, the story of an angel in deepest Africa was revealed as well as crafts, stories about Saints and Jesus’ childhood… TAN has reprinted the first 20 and they are a big hit with the 3-9 year old crowd. A friend found 21-38 at a yard sale and I xeroxed them all for my kids.

    When our parish in Maine had a Maryknoll sister give a missionary talk I gave her $20, “because we love the Treasure Box books.” She looked at me, like I had two heads. I can imagine her thoughts, “Why would anyone want to read that superstitious pious junk?”

  63. Ben Trovato says:

    Which is more likely: that God incarnate was so influenced by the cultural norms of His time that He got it wrong? Or that Fr Bourgeois (and Brendan etc) is so influenced by the cultural norms of his time that he got it wrong?

  64. Brendan Peters says:

    Dear Edward C,

    Admittedly you speak more rationally than previous bloggers on this page,
    and you don’t get personal! However, you do fall ito the error of perceiving the Church as somehow timeless or outside of and untouched by history when clearly she is sociologically and historically conditioned and it is thorugh these vey conditions that the Holy Spirit works. Change is of the essence of her nature. Didn’t Vat 2 call the church to semper reformand
    a, to aggiornamento and to ressourcement. We are a pilgrim people of God who incarnationally must keep our feet planted firmly on this earth as Jesus of Nazareth did. Roy Bourgeios is a Gospel person, he is close to the kingdom of God in speaking up for the little ones of this earth. Incidentally, since when did it become official that the less than greta JPII was called ‘Great’?

  65. Jeannie says:

    “Fr Bourgeous is a man of integrity who, like all prophets who speak the truth to power, is being given short shrift by the fearful and ignorant. You cannot chain God’s Holy Spirit who calls women to an equal status within the Church of today.”

    Oops! You’re too late! I already have equal status within the Church.

    The fact that men have the possibility of ordination and a public teaching role that is closed to women is no more objectionable than the fact that women have the possibility of nurturing new life and bonding with a child in a way that is closed to men. It is interesting to me that no one ever suggests that the Church discriminates against men by perpetuating the idea that the woman is the heart of the home. Are men not diminished by their lack of centrality at the family hearth? The assertion that the Church discriminates against women but not against men reveals the prejudiced idea that the things men do are inherently more valuable than the things women do. They aren’t.

  66. TJM says:

    Brendan, are you a refugee from The National Anti-Catholic Reporter? Or Catholics for Obama? Tom

  67. QC says:

    “semper reformanda” as used in that context meant ever more closely reforming our lives in accordance with the truth as those great reforming saints (Catherine of Siena, Peter Damian, etc.) exhorted the members of the Church to in their days, rather than conformining the truth to be more in accord with the fads of the day.

    As far as speaking up for little ones, has Bourgieos spoekn up for the unborn, rather than the independent modern women he crusades for?

  68. Brendan Peters says:

    No Jeannie, it’s no ore objectionable to you but it is to many women (not only those who feel called to priestly ministry)and there are many ways of being a woman than the rather unimaginative one that you promote

  69. Brendan Peters says:

    No,Tom, I am, however, a member of Voice of the Faithful, FutureChurch, We are Church, Catholics for a Changing Church, the Movement for Married Priests etc. Get the picture?!

  70. Pseudomodo says:

    Brenden, Eensal,

    I had already read the words integrity, prophets, truth to power, short shrift, fearful and ignorant. Regarding this priest this is all crap.

    By the time I got to Equal Status, I realized that God had already established that in Genesis and Jesus Christ had confirmed it in the Gospels.

    Fr. Bourgeois needs a real dressing down.

  71. Brendan Peters says:

    Catherine is one of my favorite saints – SHE wasn’t afraid to cahllenge the Pope!!!

  72. Edward C. says:

    Yes, Brendan, you are right in that we do in fact evolve. The Church does and has molded itself over the centuries. But, and this is a big but, we are bound in our evolution to the words of Christ and the sacred Traditions upon which we are built. I would gladly accept women priests had Christ instructed both sexes during the last supper to “do this in remembrance of me”. But in the end, that is not the case, there were no women present, he addressed only his male disciples, the 12 apostles from which the priesthood comes. We are after all “one holy and apostolic church”. Be assured I do not nor will I ever deny you your right to believe and say what you feel to be true in your heart. I will however prevent actions and beliefs contrary to the Traditions of the Church from influencing and taking root within the Church.

    “We are a pilgrim people of God who incarnationally must keep our feet planted firmly on this earth as Jesus of Nazareth did” You forget here that Christ was fully man and fully God. He was certainly in this world, but even more certainly- not of it. As Christians we are called to emulate and replicate this in our own daily lives. We must constantly be in this world, but not of it. Our minds must always be bent towards the eternal, to Christ. It is sin to let the passing world shape our souls lest they lead us more closely towards the temporal, and further from the eternal.

    As for John Paul, I will allow you your opinion, but please, allow me mine. ; ) God Bless!

  73. Jordanes says:

    Brendan said: there are many ways of being a woman than the rather unimaginative one that you promote.

    Nope. There is only one way that a human can be a woman. It’s called “Double X Chromosomes.” If it’s XY, you’re not a woman, even if you wear a dress and high heels. If it’s XX, you’re not a man, even if you wear pants and have a beard.

  74. Thomas says:


    You’re misunderstanding of St. Catherine is astounding. Don’t use a holy, faithful, obedient saint to justify your own heresy. It’s disgusting.

  75. Jeannie says:

    I do not need to create an “imaginative” existence for myself, because being the person that God made me is enough. The fact that you think women need a man (you) to speak up for women is arrogant. I do not have to see women at the altar in order to have a sense of my own value. If there is a woman out there who feels called to the priesthood, I’ll bet she can read, think and construct a paragraph without your help. I’d like to hear from her, not from a man who thinks he knows what she thinks, feels and wants. Thanks anyway.

  76. Brendan Peters says:

    Jeannie, if you think you have equal status in the church then think again! there are plenty of reactionary clerics who would be only too happy to make the sanctuary a female-free zone

  77. RJM says:

    I thought Msgr. Pope handled himself very well. I’m glad CNN tabbed him to represent the Church’s position.

  78. Jayna says:

    I wish people like him wouldn’t say things like ‘many priests and laymen agree with me on this’. I’d hate for anyone to think I’m lumped in with that lot. I do not feel as though I am being discriminated against, and yet he’s shouting at the top of his lungs that I am.

    And the reason there is a priest shortage is not for any lack of able-bodied men, it’s a lack of the proper fostering of vocations among young men because of people like Fr. Bourgeois. If he put this much effort into helping men discern true vocations, we’d have a surplus on our hands.

  79. Brendan Peters says:

    Then, Jeannie, get out a bit more because yo sure as hell aint gonna meet that kind
    of alive from the head up sorta woman on this blog, are you?

  80. Jason Keener says:

    Father Roy says the Church is sexist for not ordaining women. Is God sexist too because He did not allow men the privilege of giving birth to a new human life?

    Men and women are of equal dignity. That doesn’t mean they are called to do the exact same things in the plan of God. Father Roy should stop viewing the Church’s teachings through the lenses of modern sociology and political correctness.

    I hope Father Roy has a change of heart.

  81. Brendan Peters says:

    I thought Fr Pope was very wooden and feaful

  82. Son of Trypho says:

    “Then, Jeannie, get out a bit more because yo sure as hell aint gonna meet that kind
    of alive from the head up sorta woman on this blog, are you?”

    -it is beyond ironic that someone arguing for the dignity of women demeans them so casually isn’t it?

  83. Brendan Peters says:

    Can’t believe I had to use ‘viva il papa’ as an anti-spam word. Anyway, Pope only
    represents the views of a herd-like minority. There are plenty of alternative views and they”re gaining momentum all the time

  84. Brendan Peters says:

    Welcome aboard, Trypho junior! Actually, some women demean themselves by playing subservient to men when they are called to life in abundance

  85. Ben Trovato says:

    Brendan: ” feel called to priestly ministry”

    Precisely: this is a subjective state.

    What we have to discern is whether it is a subjective state in conformity with God’s will or against it (we have ample experience of both in our own lives)…

    To do that we rely not on current socio-political thinking but on the teaching of God Himself, both during His life on earth and through the teaching office of His Church.

    Christ’s example was to treat women with high regard and great love – and differently from men, whom alone he called to be apostles. His Church teaches unequivocally that women cannot be ordained.

    For these reasons you are utterly mistaken and misguided, however sincere you may be.

    I repeat my earlier question: Which is more likely: that God incarnate was so influenced by the cultural norms of His time that He got it wrong? Or that Fr Bourgeois is so influenced by the cultural norms of his time that he got it wrong?

  86. Jayna says:

    Head up sort of women? Honestly, you are just as misguided as the rest of them, not to mention insulting. Do not for one moment think that the reason a woman could disagree with female ordination has anything to do with how one displays one’s emotions. That is an immature and juvenile understanding of the issue. How about we start with women who are faithful to the teachings of the Church? There are lots of those around here.

    And I’ll thank you to note that you needn’t be a “reactionary cleric” (the irony of you using that particular turn of phrase is just too much) to think the sanctuary should be a “female-free zone”. You say it like it’s a bad thing.

  87. Mr. WAC says:

    Very proud today to say that Msgr. Pope officiated at our (Solemn High Indult) marriage.

  88. Son of Trypho says:


    I find that it provides an interesting insight into your character that on this thread you have personally made the most demeaning and sexist remark concerning women here.

    It would seem that you have the problem with women, not the other commentators.

  89. Edward C. says:

    “I find that it provides an interesting insight into your character that on this thread you have personally made the most demeaning and sexist remark concerning women here.” – Son of Trypho

    Perhaps, but more likely is that he does not think she lives up to his own personal idea of what a woman really is. Feminism I thought was a sort of climbing out of the box. A woman by means of modern feminism, ironically still has the right to believe what she wishes. It is uncharitable to attack a woman for believing in traditional expressions of femininity. Un-feminist really, if she doesn’t want to loose the bra and join the priesthood, she doesn’t have to. Feminism is about choice, Brendan needs to respect a woman’s choice to hold true to Sacred Tradition.

  90. Edward C. says:

    wait, what I previously said won’t make sense. Brendan wasn’t referring to the person I thought he was. But still, my initial idea stands. Modern feminism is closed-minded in regards to a woman’s choice.

  91. Son of Trypho says:

    “Perhaps, but more likely is that he does not think she lives up to his own personal idea of what a woman really is.”

    -I agree Edward and dare I say it?

    Not living up to his own personal idea of what a woman really is – that would be an example of patriarchy wouldn’t it?

    As I noted before, beyond irony (and parody really).

  92. Edward C. says:

    “that would be an example of patriarchy wouldn’t it?” haha only when he personally came up with the idea and enforces/perpetuates it. That’s not the case here.

  93. Bonifacius says:

    It’s a pity that Msgr. Pope implied female diocesan chancellors is a good thing — a matter of the correct “respect” for women. Maybe that was simply a rhetorical point, and he personally does not support it.

  94. Ahhh…. see the sort of person who backs the heresy of Fr. Bourgeois? Nasty and insulting. Typical progressivist attack.

    He won’t be joining us anymore, btw.

  95. TJM says:

    Brendan sounds like a former Catholic based on the organizations he holds memberships in. As I recall, Bishop Bruskewitz excommunicated folks living in his diocese who belong to these ersatz Catholic clubs. We’ll pray that you recover Catholic beliefs, Brendan. Tom

  96. Megan says:

    When does Bourgeois’ excommunication become “official”? I thought he had already gotten the letter proclaiming him excommunicated?

    Another argument for a male-only priesthood that I was surprised Msgr. Pope didn’t mention: Only MEN were present at the Last Supper. This is when the Eucharist was instituted, this is when Christ gave the Apostles the faculty to change bread and wine into His Body and Blood. Same thing with giving them the power to bind and loose sins, etc.

    May God have mercy on Fr. Roy Bourgeois and his very misguided disciples.

  97. taad says:

    We are clearly in a time of great deception and many are falling for it. The devil
    continues to use the same techniques he used in the Garden, trying to tell us what
    God really said and what we should do.

    The other point is that Christ is the Bride Groom, and the Church is the Bride. The
    only people this type of Wedding Feast can make any sense to is those who are fighting
    for a new type of ‘marriage” which also goes against what Christ taught.

  98. taad says:

    Let me calrify my previous post…I meant to say that those who think that a woman
    can be a preist can only think this is possible if homosexual “marriage” is possib;e
    since the priest is taking the place of Christ as the Bride Groom.

  99. RBrown says:

    Fr Bourgeous is a man of integrity

    Why? Because he believes more in his own opinions than he does in the Church?

    who, like all prophets who speak the truth to power,

    You’re being presumptuous–and a bit Marxist–by thinking it to be true.

    .is being given short shrift by the fearful and ignorant.

    I assure you that I am neither. I do think, however, that you are confusing foolish boldness with courage (Celti propter stultitiam suam timent nihil). In fact, they are contradictories.

    You cannot chain God’s Holy Spirit who calls women to an equal status within the Church of today.
    Comment by Brendan Peters

    Why do you assume that the Holy Spirit is behind your own opinions?

  100. peregrinus says:

    “Catherine is one of my favorite saints – SHE wasn’t afraid to cahllenge the Pope

    Comment by Brendan Peters — 16 December 2008”

    Wasn’t it St Catherine who also called the Pope “Sweet Christ on Earth”? If she’s one of Brenden’s favourite saints, shouldn’t he learn from her example?

    Oh, I forgot, Brenden probably thinks he knows better than she.

    It should not a surprise that people who support the heresy of sacerdotal ordination for women actually end up demeaning women so much. I’ve listened even to women supporters of women’s ordination demean women in their arguments. For me, the ordination of women to the priesthood is intrinsically a manifestation of grave injustice to the feminine genius.

  101. I had a hard time stomaching that interview.

    “Women feel called” was repeated several times.

    He hasn’t figured out yet that “feeling called” is not the same as “being called”. A man does not discern his vocation alone and the final decision rests with the bishop. When the bishop grants ordination, then he knows he is called.

  102. Roland de Chanson says:

    Quare enim mulieres sacerdotes fieri non possunt? Quod dixit Iesus: quorum remiseritis peccata remittuntur.
    Et notum est omnibus mulieres nihil ignoscere.

    (Why is it that women cannot become priests? Because Jesus said, whose sins you shall forgive, they
    are forgiven. And as is well known, women never forgive anything.)

  103. “there are many ways of being a woman than the rather unimaginative one that you promote.”

    I find the comment above to be very insulting to women. As a college professor, I was talking with a young lady about her career goals. She told me that her goal was to be a wife and mother and that ultimately she wants to get married, stay home, and raise her children. She also told me that many individuals had said to her that such a goal was a choice to waste her life and her education. I quickly told her that receiving a liberal arts education would make her a better mother particularly if she chose to home-school her kids.

    People in our culture do not think about this much, but God, in His infinite wisdom, could have chosen any way He wanted to, to enter into history and become man. Which way did He choose? He chose to enter history through a woman, a Mother. If that does not say something about the inherent dignity of women and the honorable profession of Motherhood, then I do not know what does.

    And, if we are going to speak of imagination, imagine being so close to God that one actually gets to participate in the creation and formation of a brand new soul with the potential of living forever in the very presence of God! Parents get to do this! And Mothers in particular have a central role in this! I do not know about you, but working in an office or in some other profession just does not seem to me to be on the same level as being a collaborator with God in the creation and the formation of a new human being with an immortal soul that has such potential to do so much good here on earth and then spend eternity with God. (No disrespect intended toward office workers or any other profession.)

  104. joye says:

    Ugh, Roland, we have more than enough actual reasons why women cannot be priests without dredging up old misogyny.

    But, just to prove you wrong, I forgive you. Have better judgment next time; as the comments of Brendan prove, more people are reading these posts than just good Catholics, and some of them may take what you say as indicative of the Church.

  105. Roland de Chanson says:

    Joye, you should have more joie.

    My comment was a joke. Sorry you didn’t get it. My wife thought it was funny. And she is the family censrix deputata. But, in a spirit of bountiful Christian charity, I do accept your forgiveness and your admonition. I’ll label all future attempts at humour ridendum est. Though I deny no one’s free will to be a curmudgeoness.

    BTW, I never speak for the church. I have my mouth full speaking for myself.

  106. Templar says:

    I find the notion that woman need to be Priests to be valued by the Church insulting. It’s the same logical – idea – notion that gives us female altar boys, and lay lectors, and EMHCs. All of these share the common idea that if the laity is on “their side” of the communion rail they are some how not worthy enough or good enough. It’s utter nonsense. We’re all called to serve, in many different ways. I’m not less called because I’m laity, raising a family. I shouldn’t, and don’t, need to be ordained to be called. It’s more of the Devil’s work to blur the lines, and confuse the faithful.

  107. RBrown says:

    However, you do fall ito the error of perceiving the Church as somehow timeless or outside of and untouched by history when clearly she is sociologically and historically conditioned and it is thorugh these vey conditions that the Holy Spirit works. Change is of the essence of her nature. Didn’t Vat 2 call the church to semper reformanda, to aggiornamento and to ressourcement.

    If you’re saying that doctrinal formulae have been influenced in non-essential ways by certain sociological and historical conditions, then I would have to say that is possible

    On the other hand, if you’re saying–as you seem to be–that such formulae have been essentially influenced by these conditions, such that the Church can contradict herself in doctrinal matters (e.g., the possibility of ordaining women), then I would say that is little else than Gnosticism in an updated form (aka Modernism).

    Further, the principle you espouse (“sociologically and historically conditioned”) must be subjected to itself. Thus: if all truth is socially and historically conditioned, then so also is that principle–which makes it invalid.

    BTW, in theological circles that principle has been out of fashion for some years.

    NB: Rahner thought that in development of doctrine, there can be no contradiction.

    We are a pilgrim people of God who incarnationally must keep our feet planted firmly on this earth as Jesus of Nazareth did.

    Agree. But your progressivism is typical of someone whose feet are not planted on this earth.

    Roy Bourgeios is a Gospel person, he is close to the kingdom of God in speaking up for the little ones of this earth. Incidentally, since when did it become official that the less than greta JPII was called ‘Great’?
    Comment by Brendan Peters

    He’s not speaking up for the little ones of this earth–there is no movement in 3rd World countries to ordain women. He’s speaking for the liberals whose faith is in their own progressivism–not in Christ’s Church.

  108. Ohio Annie says:

    Fr. Z, thank you. That mean poster made some remarks that really made me feel bad. I once studied for the Anglican priesthood and thought I was called to serve in that way but during my studies discovered the true Church and found I was wrong. But I have struggled with sexism in other ways, never having married, grad school/having a career in a mostly male field, having a more male gender identity (by the world’s idiotic standards) than is sometimes comfortable, etc. Boy, sometimes it’s the liberals that just creep me out. The sexism of any conservatives is really easier to deal with than the sexism of the liberals. At least the conservatives allow me to be Catholic as the Church teaches. I love my new Faith.

  109. Fr J says:

    As I always explain it to people – the simple crux of the matter is that Christ became incarnate as a man – the priest acts “in persona Christi” at the Altar – Christ through Him offers Himself, priest and victim. A woman can no sooner act “in persona Christi” than one would cast a boy to play “in persona” the Blessed Virgin in a nativity play.

    Mary was a woman, female; Christ was a man, male; the balance in God’s plan of salvation for His creation (male and female He created them) is represented in their respective roles.

  110. Tina in Ashburn says:

    The comments here describing how demeaning it is to women to suggest they aren’t good enough unless they can attain ordination is right on. Thanks to all of you for this excellent observation.

    What, like the other stuff I do isn’t good or imaginative enough because only what men do is the worthy thing?

    This thought pervades civilization so thoroughly, we hardly notice. [Its as old an idea as when the serpent incited Eve to disobedience]

    Additionally, I get a bit indignant towards those who want to push off more work to women. If a woman can do it, then some men will certainly let them do it all. Can’t these men do ANYTHING without dumping on women??

    Okay, so we bear children, keep house, are expected also to have a full-time successful paying career – and now somebody thinks we should be running the Church and saying Mass too? Sounds like woman’s lib is a man’s idea of freeing men and enslaving women.

    It is true and well-said above in a couple of comments that the secret to happiness is SERVICE not power. Happiness for both genders is serving all in the capacity for which we were made.

    Christianity has done more for women than any other influence. Christianity frees us to be what God meant us to be! God is good!

    Fr B, certain unfaithful orders, Catholic-affiliated schools that aren’t Catholic, Catholic-affiliated publications and websites that aren’t Catholic…all of that – Are there corrective actions from the Vatican to mitigate the damage of these influences?

  111. For all those “womyn” who think they are ‘called’ to Holy Orders:

    I know from personal experience that an attraction is not necessarily a vocation, a calling.

    One may be attracted to a life of penance, a life of officially preaching the Gospel, a life of daily offering the Sacrifice, a life of hearing confessions, a life of literally holding Our Lord in one’s hands…HOWEVER,

    unless we receive a vocation from God, our attraction is not in conformity with the Will of God, and unless we receive a former calling from the ordaining bishop, no one may receive Holy Orders.

    No one has a “right” to Holy Orders, neither men nor women.

  112. my kidz mom says:

    Fr. J wrote: “A woman can no sooner act ‘in persona Christi’ than one would cast a boy to play ‘in persona’
    the Blessed Virgin in a nativity play.”

    >heavy sigh<

    That’s exactly what I told my DRE, who thought it perfectly acceptable to cast a little girl as Jesus
    in our children’s Stations of the Cross during Lent last year. And that’s one of many reasons why
    I’m no longer a catechist at our parish.

  113. Scott says:

    I thought Msgr. Pope did an excellent job, given the little time he had to work with. It is a great source of joy that we in D.C. can count on the good Father for a solid homily and a devout liturgy.

    I wonder though if there isn’t a bigger issue not being discussed here. The regular readers of WDTPRS all agree that female priests are impossible (not to mention a bad idea). That issue, I think is the one of male/female roles in general. E.g., headmanship. I think, for example, we could argue about wether a female
    chancellor is a good idea.


  114. Memphis Aggie says:

    The ex-Father seems to be all about politics and naught about God. There’s a false presumption that he spouts to the effect that precluding women from the priesthood is bigoted (so he accuses the Church of sin) and that respect for women must include the ordination of women (as if we don’t venerate Saintly women and as if the historical origin of respect for women was not derived from the Church and it’s love of Mary).

    Of course if the Father had a open mind he might have repented. If his conscience was well formed then he would remember his vow of obedience to the Bishop and if he was humble he’d have heeded the warnings. It seems that the ex-Father has been given every opportunity to reconcile and his lack of apparent remorse or concern demonstrates his stiff neck. He choose this outcome. May Christ have mercy and soften his heart.

  115. Al says:

    That was very painful to watch.

  116. Memphis Aggie says:


    I think the bigger issue is that holy orders are a sacrament and therefore not negotiable because they are gifts of God and not for us to tinker with. Its Peligianism again.

  117. Scott says:


    That isn’t in dispute (at least, among the faithful).

    I do think that male/female roles are, in general, poorly understood by Catholics today, but that perhaps would be more profitably discussed in another post.


  118. St. Rafael says:

    The whole thing was a debacle.

    Msgr. Pope defended the the teaching as best he could, though he was not as forceful as he should have been. That only men can be ordained, is not just a doctrine and dogma, but part of the orginal deposit of faith from Jesus to the apostles. Msgr. Pope also failed to use the word heresy and call out Fr. Bourgeois as a heretic.

    Msgr. Pope also stepped in it with his absurd support for a female chancellor. Lay female chancellors are an abomination. As a Traditional Catholic, I believe these positions should always be held by a cleric. It is time we Catholics start defending some clericalism.

    Fr. Bourgeois did make only two good points. There is a severe shortage of priests that are due to the Novus Ordo, Modernism, and all the liberalism of the last forty years. He also did a good job of calling out the Church for the sexual abuse crisis that happened because the Church allowed so many Homosexuals to be ordained as priests.

  119. Bruce says:

    “I know from personal experience that an attraction is not necessarily a vocation, a calling.”

    Well said David. I am attracted to the Carthusian monastic order, however I know that the monastic life is not my vocation or calling. I have seen a few people who mistook an attraction to the Priesthood as a calling. When they were found unsuitable by the Church to be Priests they took it as a rejection of their self worth and are still bitter.

  120. Gert Gelotte says:

    Well, it is true that Jesus chose 12 men for apostles. But it is also true that he chose 12 jewish men. He could have chosen at least some non-jews, but he didn´t. So if we, for this reason, have to stick with Men only as priests we must make sure that they are jews and we shouldn´t have more than 12.

    Gert Gelotte

  121. RBrown says:

    Well, it is true that Jesus chose 12 men for apostles. But it is also true that he chose 12 jewish men. He could have chosen at least some non-jews, but he didn´t. So if we, for this reason, have to stick with Men only as priests we must make sure that they are jews and we shouldn´t have more than 12.
    Comment by Gert Gelotte

    1. That was of course the controversy addressed by the Apostles at the Council of Jerusalem, i.e., the relationship to the Mosaic Law of non Jews who became Christians. The moral precepts (Ten Commandments) have been retained, but the ceremonial precepts were replaced by the Sacraments–Circumcison by Baptism, The Passover by the Eucharist.

    Thus it is not necessary that a non Jew become a Jew before becoming a Christian.

    2. You are unintentionally correct about the Apostles. They were all Jews, and there were 12. That does not change.

    Although Bishops are considered successors to the Apostles, the extraordinary power of the Twelve has not been transmitted to them LG Nota Praevia)

Comments are closed.