COLUMBUS, Ga. (CNA) —The Maryknoll Fathers and Brothers have notified Father Roy Bourgeois he will be dismissed from their order unless he renounces his “defiant stance” against Catholic teaching on the ordination of women.
Denver-based canon lawyer J.D. Flynn said the continuing disciplinary action against the excommunicated priest is about restoring justice and repairing scandal.
“The issue is that Father Bourgeois is in a position of public ministry in the Church. He is perceived to be speaking for the Church. When he says things which aren’t consistent with what we know to be true, it can lead people into sinfulness,” Flynn told CNA on Aug. 9.
“When the sacraments are simulated, we are all wounded by that,” he added. “All of us in the Church suffer when we lose clarity about the sacraments and run into error. No priest should be permitted to lead us into error.”
Flynn said the disciplinary action is “really about the Church trying to make clear that a person who is leading us into sinfulness is not acting as minister of the Church.”
Father Bourgeois is a human-rights activist who founded the group SOA Watch, which monitors the U.S. government’s training of military personnel in Latin America. He was excommunicated in 2008 for participating in an attempted ordination of a woman to the priesthood at a Unitarian church in Lexington, Ky.
Maryknoll superior general Father Edward Dougherty, in a July 27 letter, warned Father Bourgeois of his imminent dismissal on the grounds that he had shown “obstinate disobedience” to his superiors in violation of his oath about a “grave matter.” The letter also cited his “diffusion of teachings” opposed to the “definitive teaching of John Paul II and the magisterium of the Catholic Church” as well as the “grave scandal” he has caused to the people of God, to the Church, and to many Maryknoll priests and brothers.
The order gave the priest 15 days after receiving the letter to renounce publicly his stand on women’s ordination, or face dismissal.
Father Bourgeois’ Aug. 8 reply said that Catholic Church teaching “excludes women from the priesthood” and “defies both faith and reason and cannot stand up to scrutiny.” He said the teaching is “rooted in sexism,” which “like racism, is a sin.”
He said the instruction to recant is “telling me to lie and say I do not believe that God calls both men and women to the priesthood.”
“This I cannot do; therefore, I will not recant,” he said.
Flynn defended Catholic teaching, explaining that the Catholic Church “holds definitively that ordination is reserved to men only.”
“This doesn’t mean the Catholic Church thinks that women are less, or that that they have less of a role in church. What that doctrine really means is that we believe that people are called to different roles in the Church, different kinds of vocations, but they are all equal in dignity. It’s St. Paul’s idea that there are many parts to the body.”
“Women are called to many different kinds of ministry and service in the Church and in the world, and so are men, but just as a man couldn’t become a mother, which is perhaps the noblest vocation, a woman is unable to become a priest, deacon or bishop,” Flynn added.
The Catholic Church ordains only men “because Jesus ordained men,” he said. “We take seriously the idea that genders are different and have different roles to play in the Church.”
He said that Jesus had “great love for women” but didn’t ordain even his revered mother Mary.
“In following that example, we believe it was the intention of Our Lord to recognize the distinction between fatherhood and motherhood, between masculinity and femininity, to create men as deacons, priests and bishops in the Church.”
Flynn suggested that American society in general rejects Catholic teaching on ordination because it confuses “equality in function with equality in dignity.”
“We believe that for people to be equal they have to be able to do all of the same things. … We’ve done away with the idea that people can have different functions and yet be equal in dignity and be equal in love of the Lord.”
This results in the loss of the idea that some roles are reserved for women and some roles are for men.
Father Bourgeois’ case will proceed to the Vatican, where he faces formal removal from the priesthood, a process known as laicization.
As an excommunicated priest, he cannot be a minister of the sacraments and his participation in the life of the Church is limited, Flynn explained.
However, he is still a member of the Maryknoll order until he is dismissed, and he is still recognized as a priest under Church law.
“The process of laicization removes him from the clerical state, to clarify that he has no ability to exercise ministry in the Church,” Flynn said.
Bourgeois’ excommunication was a “medicinal penalty” intended to evoke repentance.
Flynn told CNA, “When that didn’t work, and only when that didn’t seem to work, and Father perdured, did the Church begin the formal process she’s using now, which is separating Father from the formal ministry of the Church.”
Mark Brumley: Aren't You Ashamed?
Matthew Warner: Ask Fr. Barron: What to say to Catholics who struggle with Church teaching?
Comments
Post a Comment
The church has authorty for altar girls, women lectors, women extra ordinary ministers,and women cantors. so the church has authoty to ordian women as priests. Jesus said to the apostles what you loose on earth you loose in heaven gives the church to ordain women as priests. What is the pope cardinals bishops priests afraid women will be better than them as priests. If there were womaen priest there might not be as priest shortage. A woman is just as capable of being a priest just as a man is capable of being priest.
A human woman was taken from the side of Adam.
The Second Adam, Christ died on the Cross.
His side was opened, and a blood and water gushed from there.
A woman was born - the Church.
A man needs to leave his mother and father, and join a woman and become One.
This man can either join a human woman or can join the Woman-The Church. The second one is a priest.
Because of that the priest can be only a man for only a man can marry a woman.
Becoming a husband of the Church the priest becomes a spiritual father to all the flock, but many, He must die to himself and become Christ for the Church and Her children can hurt the priest more than a human woman.
Why would a man put himself out to suffer more?
Either because he does not understand this concept and does it for his own strangly understood ambition or He is ready to suffer more than others out of obiedience.
If a woman wants to become a woman-priest then she does not understand the second part - suffering. If she wants to suffer for Christ, she can chose a better way - obedience.
Looks like Father Bourgeois decided to quit obedience to Christ and build his own nonexisting kingdom. I hope he will read this, and I hope the flock he tends will add him to the list of their prayers.
Poeople! Add your priests to the list of your prayers. You need priests! You need holy priests. Without them you will not have Life within you!
Blessings,
Greg.
Dear Gary - Pope John Paul II said from the Chair of Peter - “no women can become priest, end of discussion.” If the Pope said that through the authority of Christ and this is what Christ said.
Blessings,
Greg.
I think women priests is not only acceptable but even desirable. At what point do I get excommunicated?
Gary, your interpretation of Matthew 16:19 is entirely too simplistic to hold water here. In the same way that the Church does not have the authority to say that adultery is okay, it does not have the authority to ordain women as priests. By your logic, Jesus’ handing over the keys of the kingdom implies that the Church can literally say ANYTHING, and it will be okay, because “whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” But that is taking the quote out of context; there is a structure, a framework, within which that conferrance of authority operates, namely, the teachings and example of Christ. Christ clearly said that adultery is a sin, and hence the Church does not have the authority to rule adultery to be okay (to use an example here).
In the first part of your comment, you seemed to imply that altar girls, lectors, EMHCs, and cantors are all on the same level as the priesthood. Not so, in the strongest possible sense. The priesthood is a very special calling, in which a man swears to celibacy and acts in the person of Christ in confecting the Eucharist (among other duties). There is an inherent dignity to be found in the priesthood that is not present in any of those duties/callings that you previously mentioned.
I think you ought to look (again, assuming you read that part) at the analogy of St. Paul on the Church being a body made up of different parts but equal dignity. That’s the crux of the issue. The inability to become a priest on the part of a woman does not in any way diminish her dignity, and a man’s inability to become a mother does not diminish his dignity. It’s all about complementary, which most people trying to apply the secular idea of equality to this issue just can’t seem to grasp.
Roy Bourgeois should have expressed this view before he took his vows of obedience and loyalty to the teachings of the Church. He is breaking his vow. He once acknowledged agreement with this teaching by becoming a priest. Now he disagrees. It is no different than a man or woman who decides he or she does not want to be married after taking their vows. Lay people are free to have absurd opinions about Church teachings, priests are not.
Tim W, are you equating having a woman for a priest with adultery? Or that people (including priests and some Bishops) who advocate for women priests are, by necessity, relativists? This makes no sense. I can understand why the Church does not have women priests. I cannot understand why the Church says (or, at least, is moving toward saying) “If a person thinks women should be priests, they are excluded from this church.” It makes no sense. It is nothing like saying “adultery is ok” or “abortion is ok.”
Also, in response to the analogy of St. Paul on the Church being made up of different parts but equal dignity: While there is some beautiful symbolism in that analogy, that’s just what it is - symbolism to help us understand and get our human minds around the relationship between the Church and Christ. It does not mean the Church is literally bound by a specific gender role; nor that genders within the Church are bound by specific roles. I don’t suggest genders have to be equal (that would be impossible). I suggest that genders don’t have to be bound or confined by symbolism in the Tradition of the church.
There are other christian communities who claim they have women priests, so, why can;t others respect diversity when it comes to the Catholic Church? It is not sexist that women can not become priests anymore than it is sexist that a man can not become a nun.
Jesus chose only men even though there were other faiths at the time that had women priests.
Is Jesus sexist?
How often in the past have we heard these same dissenting words from others as we have from this excommunicated priest. I’m surprised it has taken this long to totally remove him.
The church as offically spoken on this issue and the issue is closed. If people are not happy with such a teaching they are free to leave. No one is forcing them to stay.
@Richard
I apologize if my language seemed ambiguous. I wasn’t equating having a female “priest” with adultery as it pertains to sinfulness - I was only trying to draw attention to the fact that the Church may not declare adultery to be a non-sin, because its teachings must reflect the teachings and/or example of Christ. By a similar principle, the Church does not have the authority to ordain women as priests because it does not reflect the example of Jesus. I am arguing that the priesthood is a reflection of the complementary roles inherent in the genders, and that Christ, through his example, recognized this and instituted different, complementary roles for men and for women within His Church.
You mentioned not understanding why the Church seems to be saying that people who think women should be priests ought to be excluded. I don’t think that they ought to be excluded (i.e. excommunicated/laicized), unless (as in the case of Fr. Bourgeois) they are prominent ministers of the Church who are openly teaching things directly contrary to that which the Magisterium teaches. Catholics are bound to accept the doctrines as set forth by the Church (“accept” does not necessarily mean “like,” but the key is acceptance and adherence to), and as such open rebellion against Her teachings inevitably leads others astray, they need to be chastised and corrected. Fr. Bourgeois, unfortunately, refuses to desist in his blatant rebellion against the Church’s infallible teachings regarding this issue, and as such, he is being punished for it (cf. Mt 18: 15-17). The same goes for any bishops or other clergy who do so.
As mtm said in (his? her?) post, laypeople are allowed to express reservations about Church teachings, although they must accept them nonetheless. On the other hand, it’s a different matter if a priest, who made specific and binding vows to the Church and the Magisterium of Christ, breaks those vows and teaches something directly contrary to the Church’s teachings. In this case, a shepherd is leading his flock astray, and it is the duty of the Church to rebuke him and have him recognize his error. To break the Bourgeois situation down: He denies that Blessed John Paul II’s infallible pronouncement that the Church may not ordain women as priests is truth, which in turn would seem to deny the Holy Spirit’s guidance in this matter, which in turn denies that the Holy Spirit is at all a guiding force in matters of faith and doctrine, which is the backbone of the Church’s authority here on earth. After all, a central teaching regarding the papacy’s authority is that the pope is infallible in infallibly defined matters of faith and doctrine - which is what the statement in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis in 1994 was. It’s pretty simply, really.
I hope that cleared a few things up. God bless.
The arguments for an all-male priesthood are intellectually embarrassing, but I accept the basic position because in order to remain a Catholic, I must. Father Bourgeois cannot reconcile the definitive teaching of the magisterium with his conscience, a stance so contrary to his own self-interest that it must be genuine. He must, as he will, go. We should all grieve for the loss of his fidelity and his estrangement from God, at least in this one instance. These are saddening events.
Comments such as those of Gary and John Glad are to be expected when the Church makes catastrophically stupid mistakes, as it did when it caved in to pressure and allowed altar girls, women lectors, etc., etc. Having given the liberals that inch it was to be expected that they would now take a mile and demand female priestesses. The liberals in the Church - and that includes the weak Popes like JPII who caved in to them - share the responsibility for this ungodly mess we are in. Gary’s and John’s remarks are perfectly understandable (even if they are wrong) given the state of the Church just now.
Regarding this priest’s excommunication: if he was indeed formally excommunicated then the whole business about whether or not he is a member of the Maryknoll order is moot. When you’re excommunicated you’re out of the Church; you’re not a Catholic anymore; you’re out, period. This priest has more to worry about than whether or not he is a Maryknoller because being outside the Church he is no longer on the road to salvation. As for his priesthood that, of course, is another matter. He is “a priest forever…” unless and until he is laicized.
This priest is seriously misguided and is no longer a Catholic. Pray for him.
Steve B., my identity as a Catholic is not wrapped up in whether women are priests or not. It happens to be a teaching I struggle with and find illogical. I don’t think that struggle suggests I should leave the Church.
Dan, I find it curious that you are so willing to throw Pope John Paul II under the bus given that if someone said he “created an ungodly mess” by essentially closing the issue of Women’s Ordination, you would want to throw them out instantaneously. Perhaps since you are in such vehement disagreement with the Church on this issue, Steve B. was referring to you when he suggested people may leave the church. There are plenty of orthodox sects faithful to the Pope that would love to have you. I kind of like mine the way it is right now, as guided by your apparent nemesis Pope John Paul II.
The One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church was founded by the Son of God, Jesus- the Christ. Why do we allow ourselves to fall into error by thinking we have a better idea than God Himself? Those who walk in humility do not allow the very teachings of Christ Himself to be stumbling blocks. Our Blessed Mother lived every second of Her life embracing the Divine Will, never once giving life to her own will. If Jesus was to ever will that we have women priests, His Mother would have been the first, and the example for the rest. Can’t we just accept that, knowing that God knows best? If a priest cannot totally embrace the Truth he was ordained to imitate in all things, it is not acceptable to allow the reprobate to remain in ministry with the purpose of restructuring the church according to his desires, and not the Divine Will of God. The church has been very patient and kind in trying to get this priest to see the errors of his dissenting ways. For the welfare of all souls, since he remains defiant, he must be totally separated from the flock- lest he lead them into the precipice with himself. The Truth, to remain Truth, must be whole and entire. One cannot embrace this and disregard that, and claim to be still bearers of the Truth.
The One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church was founded by the Son of God, Jesus- the Christ. Why do we allow ourselves to fall into error by thinking we have a better idea than God Himself? Those who walk in humility do not allow the very teachings of Christ Himself to be stumbling blocks. Our Blessed Mother lived every second of Her life embracing the Divine Will, never once giving life to her own will. If Jesus was to ever will that we have women priests, His Mother would have been the first, and the example for the rest. Can’t we just accept that, knowing that God knows best? If a priest cannot totally embrace the Truth he was ordained to imitate in all things, it is not acceptable to allow the reprobate to remain in ministry with the purpose of restructuring the church according to his desires, and not the Divine Will of God. The church has been very patient and kind in trying to get this priest to see the errors of his dissenting ways. For the welfare of all souls, since he remains defiant, he must be totally separated from the flock- lest he lead them into the precipice with himself. The Truth, to remain Truth, must be whole and entire. One cannot embrace this and disregard that, and claim to be still bearers of the Truth. We pray for an illumination of conscience for Father, so that he can then be a vessel of conquering this heresy in the battlefield for our souls. Having fallen prey to this lie, and then being illumined, he will be a powerful witness to the Truth- Jesus the Christ. I truly hope and pray for this miraculous illumination for him, very soon.
Excommunicated doesn’t mean not being Catholic, if a person formally leaves the Catholic Church then they would longer be subject to Canon Law—but excommunication is specifically a canonical penalty. My understanding is that it means you are formally disallowed to receive Communion until you confess the sin.
Roman Catholic Understanding
In Roman Catholicism, the priest acts in the person of Christ in pronouncing the words that comprise part of a sacramental rite. For example, in the Mass, the Words of Institution, by which the bread becomes the Body of Christ and the wine becomes the Precious Blood. The priest and bishop act in the person of Christ the head in their leadership of the Church.
What part of acting in the PERSON OF CHRIST do people not understand? Christ was a male and women are female. Oh duh!
Get over it.
I heard Fr. Bourgeois speak about his work with SOA Watch while I was in college. It was interesting to me because I didn’t know about it.
It’s sad to read this same priest is in a grave situation with his order and the church.
About time! This priest was causing a Scandal, and I know others like him. I think the distinction made in the article that America is confused over roles is excellent. Men and Women are equal before God.
Wow Gary, are you ever far off, you posted the following with the accusation that the Prists, Bishops, Cardinals and Pope are ‘afraid’ a woman would do a better job. What? It is called obedience. Only satan thinks otherwise, always ‘pushing’ the limits. Your post below, leaves me shaking my head, knowing that satan surely lurks everywhere.
Posted by Gary on Wednesday, Aug 10, 2011 11:19 AM (EDT):The church has authorty for altar girls, women lectors, women extra ordinary ministers,and women cantors. so the church has authoty to ordian women as priests. Jesus said to the apostles what you loose on earth you loose in heaven gives the church to ordain women as priests. What is the pope cardinals bishops priests afraid women will be better than them as priests. If there were womaen priest there might not be as priest shortage. A woman is just as capable of being a priest just as a man is capable of being priest.
Roma locuta est, causa finita est. The Church has spoken, and the teaching is binding. If you do not accept it, you are in grave sin for disobeying the Church. That is the end.
There is no “discussion” on this issue. The discussion is over. Done. Finito. Arguing for women “priests” is as futile as trying to put out a fire with gasoline.
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.