Bourgeois tells Maryknoll: 'I cannot lie, I cannot recant'

It is not sad at all, it is inspiring. It is watching God work through Fr. Roy and hopefully give courage to many other priests, bishops & orders to do the same. The Vatican has become the Pharisees that Jesus sought to correct.

Thank you, Fr. Roy!

You are right. It is sad that it took this long for this scandal to be dealt with pastorally and charitably. If Fr Bourgeoisie does not want to be apart of the Church, then he can go elsewhere.

Dear Lynn A. Manfred/Pettit, Any wonder that the world is in the sad shape that it is when you have Catholics praising Catholics for the sin of disobedience to their vows made both to GOD and to their earthly people of Authority. When Sr. Christine encouraged the Sisters in her convent to support Sr. Joan in her defiance of the Vatican one does not have to wonder where Saint Benedict stood on the issue. All one has to do is read the Rule of Saint Benedict to understand that the nuns who voted 127 to 1 were wrong. At least there is one of the nuns who understands The Rule of Saint Benedict and is true to her vows.

"Fr. Roy is everything all Christians aspire to be!"
That nailed it; could not be said better. Jesus set the example as He overturned His own house, the dietary demands, working on Sunday,etc, and the other impositions dropped on our heads by an arrogant hierarchy...a bunch of overly bloated panjandrums.

No body has been able to get them to move from the television in the nursing home rec room for years, but then came that dynamic Mr. Roy!

Ms. Rojas, I am not sure I understand your comment.

FYI: 63% of all US Catholics support women's ordination.
It's not wise to judge anything from just one photo.

Not sure how you are meaning your comment but your comment, if I understand it properly, could have and probably was addressed to and about Jesus as well---so I would conclude that Fr. Roy is in good company!

Cheers,

I looked - I saw women, and not a huge crowd ...it reminded me of the early anti-racist movement...too few in the crowd and definitely not enough white men or women....Yet that mustard seed of faith flourished! I wish I could have stood alongside Fr Roy on that day...I stand with him in his beliefs.
Sharon Wilkinson

And then what? Cast some judgement on the 'People of God' based on a photograph? It might be more beneficial to the cause of the Church to find a mirror and spend some time with our own reflections.

I am always flabergasted how people who clearly come from a people long discriminated against can so easily discriminate against others.
Sexism, classicism, heterosexism, and ageism are just as evil as racism.

Are you implying that old people are not fully human beings?

The Vatican defines Catholicism and Roy Bourgeois does wrong to violate his oath of obedience.THAT is the entire story.

See link to the papal condemnation of Galileo:

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/galileo/condemnation.html

While I'm sure both Popes acted in good conscience given their understanding of the universe and Catholic doctrine at the time, I think we should consider the possibility that both doctrines and practices can evolve. The hierarchy clearly believes that only *practices* change while doctrine remains static. Some examples of changing practices include lay people being able to distribute communion and Mass being said in many languages.

But the reality is that practices influence the way we think about doctrine. As women take on more and more responsibility in parishes (in my parish, they all but run the religious education program as well as many other ministries), it is INEVITABLE that some will feel the call to the priesthood. There are those who would argue that "feeling the call" is not the same thing as actually *getting* the call, but really, how can anyone be SURE their calls are not the real deal? And with our church in short supply of priests and in desperate need of renewal, can we afford to ignore them? (BTW, I do NOT feel any such call personally, so this is not about me.)

What terrible thing do you think will happen within the church if women become priests? This is a sincere question, Alex, and I hope you will answer.

--Peace,
MB

" 'Over the pope ... there still stands one's own conscience, which must be obeyed before all else, if necessary, even against the requirement of ecclesiastical authority,' Bourgeois quotes from the future pope’s words."

Alex, if you are going to quote John Paul II over the 1976 document, then let us go even further and listen to Fr. Roy's quote Benedict XVI here.

Fr. Roy is a prophet and a hero.

And, by the way, your little reference ("Here I Stand")to Martin Luther is interesting, and frankly amusing. The church's Counter Reformation was in response to Luther. If the church had listened to Luther and cleaned up their act before they instead gave him the boot, there may have never been a need for the Protestant Reformation.

This is yet another crucial moment. You can either circle the wagons and hold onto the sexism of the church or open your arms and welcome women as priests, as God has called some of them to ordination.

Hey Alex,
You do know that Peter is dead, right?

Cheers,

No, Alex... a man spoke.

HERE I STAND
...and so much for infallibility. Is there a better example available anywhere which better demonstrates that an 'Apostolic Letter' is anything but infallible. Give JPII credit though, what better gimmick to quiet the 'faithful' into submission...that is the non-thinking ones...God forbid, anyone has a contrary thought...off with them 'rapscallions'.

JPII certainly did confirm the bretheren. But I wonder if he was a sisteren if he would have ever followed such a proclamation.

Alex, it is everything *before* the 'Wherefore' that has been rightly challenged as to its purported accuracy by biblical scholars, theologians, church historians, canon lawyers, and others.

To put it another way, JPII concluded that 1 + 1 = 3, and the experts said he was wrong.

Canon 749.3 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law requires that the official teachers clearly establish that a doctrine/teaching is infallible. The burden is on the teachers, not on the rest of us in this regard.

Quote all you wish, but Ordinatio Sacersotalis is filled with unsubstantiated papal assertions, nothing more, nothing less.

"Peter has spoken."

You mean *the* Peter who denied Christ three times!!!

Has the name of Pope John Paul II been changed to Peter???????????????

Let's see, Jesus told Peter he could hold anything he wanted loosed or bound.... In my copy of the Bible, it does not have a disclaimer that this applies to all topics except female ordinations.

This is also an example of circular logic. "We made a rule that we're always right; we made a rule that we can't change our rule, therefore, we can't change our rule."

Keep in mind that in MT 16, right after Jesus gives Peter the keys to the kingdom (MT 16:18-20), Peter, the first pope, completely misreads the will of God and is the closest Jesus comes to excommunicating anyone....ooops....so much for that infallibility thing. "From that time on, Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer greatly from the elders, the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed and on the third day be raised. Then Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him, "God forbid, Lord! No such thing shall ever happen to you." He turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are an obstacle to me. You are thinking not as God does, but as human beings do." (MT 16:21-23)

The Church constantly seems to preach that if your conscience is well-formed, you'll agree with Her, and if you don't, there's something wrong with how you formed it.

This is of course silly. And it's downright sinful when She singles out someone for simply saying what so many believe but think we cannot say out loud. (Emperor's got no clothes . . . .)

The Church comes across as the bully, and I no longer trust Her for the whole truth.

I have absolutely no doubt that 95% of those who take oaths promising fidelity to all that the Church holds and teaches hold internal exceptions that they cannot voice for fear of losing their positions. How many priests have said privately, "I can't speak up or I'd be thrown out. I cannot admit my beliefs or they would not let me be a priest." I know dozens, and I don't run in the most liberal circles out there. Every DRE, teacher, liturgical minister . . . every one of them has issues.

Our Church is built on piles of lies when leaders force oaths that folks make with fingers crossed. The Church is a human construct that we have to work around and despite. But it's still exerted a preferential option for the poor consistently through the ages, and the orders generally have done a more faithful job of expressing Christ to the world even in the Church's darkest times. I count "now" as one of those.

"We don't teach what the majority wants."

So the majority is always wrong?

I detect more than a wee bit of paternalism in your comments.

So school me. Explain why women as priests is a fatal mistake.

then what you are really saying is that it is more important to maintain maleness, closure of parishes, limiting accessibility to Liturgy and Eucharist, exclusivity etc ???? Wow

And what are those reasons?
And can you define fatal mistake?

About 15 years ago I attended Mass celebrated by an Anglican priest who is a woman. She was very beloved by her congregation in this small rural parish. I was very moved to see her saying Mass and hearing her preach. Amazingly, lightening did not strike, all was peaceful. I thought "maybe this is how black people felt when they saw Jackie Robinson in his Dodger uniform and saw him play. I carried that feeling around with me for a long time. It felt good.

"I will never attend....."
So sorry for you....I have attended and experienced community and Eucharist as I never have in my 60+ years of being a member of the Church...God was present and it was palpable......you should be so lucky.