Women find a way: Roman Catholic Womenpriests movement
These stories and an accompanying editorial appear in the Dec. 7, 2007 issue of National Catholic Reporter.
Though church bans women priests more and more women are saying, 'Why wait?'
By PAMELA SCHAEFFER
“What a day. What an occasion. What a rabbi!” The speaker was Patricia Fresen, a bishop in the Roman Catholic Womenpriests movement. The day, Nov. 11; the occasion, a jubilant ceremony at a Jewish synagogue, during which Fresen would ordain two women -- the latest of a series of such ceremonies, aimed at helping women to fulfill what they say is their calling: to serve the church as Catholic priests.
Read the full story
Profiles of five women priests
Read the full story
Reluctant bishop ordained for North America
No one was more surprised than Patricia Fresen herself when she agreed to become a bishop in the Roman Catholic Womenpriests movement.
Read the full story
EDITORIAL: Finished playing by the rules
Given that the Vatican has banned Catholics from so much as talking about women deacons or priests, is it surprising that some women are opting to fast-forward to action? They aren’t discussing whether women should be ordained; they aren’t asking for permission to be ordained; they are just doing what, as they see it, a church crying “priest shortage” needs them to do. These are women who have faithfully served the church in many ways, putting their own wishes on hold. Until finally, they have said, “Enough.”
Read the full story
hmm, I don't think any other
hmm, I don't think any other bishop is going to be willing. They don't have jurisdiction in St Louis, to allow him to continue there without Archbishop Burke's permission, nor can they incardinate a priest not released by his own bishop (Bishop John Leibrecht, of Springfield-Cape Girardeau Diocese. Then they have to face the fact that Archbishop Burke indeed knows what he can do under canon law (being one of the top American scholars on the subject and all), and will proceed with the ecclesiastical trial and Fr Marek will be stripped of his clerical state.
The Catholic Church is not like the Episcopal/Anglican communion in that a diocesan ordinary is the head of anything that goes on in the diocese, for good or for ill. Religious orders operate only under the bishop (although removing an established order from a diocese can be difficult), priests who were ordained for one diocese but serve in another are either lent or incardinated into the new diocese (either way placing them under the jurisdiction of the local bishop).
It is surprising that Fr Marek does not know this, considering that friends of his tried the same defense when called by Archbishop Burke to appear on canonical charges.
++++++
Minister to Those in
Minister to Those in Need
"Be willing to suffer injustice rather than to go to law among yourselves. In kindness and with mercy minister to all who are in distress and in need."
The more we discover how much we are Loved by God, the more we want to do God's Will
Thank You HT. God Bless and
Thank You HT. God Bless and guide You and Archbishop Burke and put mercy and compassion in your hearts.
44"But I say to you, (BG)love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,
45so that you may be (BH)sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.
46"For (BI)if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same?
47"If you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same?
The more we discover how much we are Loved by God, the more we want to do God's Will
I assume you mean my rating
I assume you mean my rating your post a 0. A quote lifted from that source, particularly without naming it, will always get such a response from me.
++++++
nightwalker on Catholic Answers
HT wrote: "Then they have to
HT wrote:
"Then they have to face the fact that Archbishop Burke indeed knows what he can do under canon law (being one of the top American scholars on the subject and all), and will proceed with the ecclesiastical trial and Fr Marek will be stripped of his clerical state."
Fr. Marek Bozek’s lawyer also being well known for his expertise in Canonical law will be more than prepared for any canonical argument Bishop Burke can come up with. I believe this is more of a political statement being made within the church, where the canon is being used to push Burke’s agenda.
You also wrote:
"The Catholic Church is not like the Episcopal/Anglican communion in that a diocesan ordinary is the head of anything that goes on in the diocese, for good or for ill. Religious orders operate only under the bishop (although removing an established order from a diocese can be difficult), priests who were ordained for one diocese but serve in another are either lent or incardinated into the new diocese (either way placing them under the jurisdiction of the local bishop)."
What you mention here is an example of how far it gets removed from the spiritual aspects of the case. The fact that Fr. Bozek is doing God’s Will in supporting His sheep is lost in the politics and Law of the situation. That is unfortunate that they lose site of the spiritual nature of the situation.
You also write:
"It is surprising that Fr Marek does not know this, considering that friends of his tried the same defense when called by Archbishop Burke to appear on canonical charges."
I think the spuriousness of your statements is a little too obvious here. I’m sure Fr. Bozek is abundantly clear, as Jesus was before the Pharisees, of what he’s willing to sacrifice here on behalf of his sisters to do God’s Will.
Peace be with you HT and all on this site.
The more we discover how much we are Loved by God, the more we want to do God's Will
It remains that Fr. Marek
It remains that Fr. Marek cannot put himself under another bishop without being released by his own bishop, who will not until the controversy is over. Nor would he be able to serve in any diocese without that bishop's permission.
As far as St Stan's being innocent "sheep", they refused to regularize their relationship to the diocese, as demanded by canon law. If they had complied, they would still be in the Church. If Fr Marek had not abandoned the people of his parish and diocese, then he would still be a priest in good standing (well, presumably). Jesus taught obedience to legitimate authority, whether secular or religious. Archbishop Burke is that authority.
After the rebellion of the parish council, the archbishop established another parish to serve the same community, this one in union with the Church. So the Archbishop provided for these people, despite the rebellion of the parish council, before Fr Marek was "hired".
++++++
nightwalker on Catholic Answers
Joer, Archbishop Burke has
Joer, Archbishop Burke has refuesed Fr. Marek's canon lawyer, Fr. Tom Doyle from operating in the diocese. As HT suggests, Archbishop Burke is an expert on canon law and certainly knows how to use it to his advantage. Nothing like playing legal games with a totally stacked deck and the house playing most of the hands.
colkoch.blogtoolkit.com
From an article that
From an article that features Sister Sara Butler's confirmation of the Church's teaching on the Priesthood:
"The issue of women Priests is not one of gender equality. Following Jesus' Own Choice of the Twelve Apostles, the Church has reserved the priesthood to males. This is not based on a belief that women are not as competent as men but rather on 'the deposit of Faith', the body of unchangeable teachings entrusted by Christ to the Church." Sister Butler explains how the highly honored persons in the Catholic Church are the Saints, the greatest of which is a woman, the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God.
The Priests and Bishops of the Catholic Church who are in communion with the Church understand their role to be one of service not of power.
I recently got a Google
I recently got a Google notice of this article here. I hadn't found it here online and I don't know if there's another thread about this development. But it does fit here.
http://ncronline.org/NCR_Online/archives2/2008a/032108/032108e.htm
St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke is moving to have Fr. Marek Bozek, pastor of St. Stanislaus Kostka Church (NCR, Feb. 22), removed from the priesthood.
In a decree published March 7 in the archdiocesan newspaper, Burke accused Bozek of breaking with the Catholic church, its teachings, sacraments and governance. Since 2005, Bozek has been at St. Stanislaus, a parish Burke has tried to suppress because it is governed by a lay board.
The archbishop said that any Catholic who knowingly participates in Bozek’s misconduct commits a serious sin. An article in the St. Louis Review said the archdiocese is offering assistance to people who have invalidly received the sacraments from Bozek.
Bozek was scheduled to attend a hearing with Burke and two canon lawyers assessing the case March 5. At a news conference just before the meeting, the Polish-born priest announced that he would not attend.
“I will not subject myself any more to this humiliating process,” he said.
Bozek said his canon lawyer has advised him “that I am not guilty of any single one of these charges. I believe I am not, and that’s my lawyer’s advice.”
Burke’s decree says Bozek is guilty of eight “canonical delicts” including:
“Pertinacious rejection” of the church’s infallible doctrine that women cannot be ordained;
“Simony”;
“Illegitimate exercise of the priestly ministry”;
“Inciting and provoking animosity or hatred toward and disobedience against the Apostolic See or a bishop.”
The decree accuses Bozek of a ninth violation: “Protracted contumacy in schism.” The archbishop is empanelling a tribunal to consider this charge, which could lead to Bozek’s dismissal from the clerical state.
Bozek told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch that he had communicated with other “valid Catholic bishops” who might be willing to accept him. He did not identify any bishop.
Three hundred St. Stanislaus parishioners attended a church board meeting March 2 to discuss whether the parish should stand behind Bozek. Board chairman William Bialczak estimates that about 100 of the 550 registered parishioners want Bozek removed.
Two St. Louis women received notifications of excommunication from Burke March 12. Rose Marie Dunn Hudson and Elsie Hainz McGrath were ordained Nov. 11 by Bishop Patricia Fresen of the Roman Catholic Womenpriests movement. The notices include Fresen’s name, though Fresen is a resident of Germany.
-- NCR Staff
I do believe The Archbishop by his actions may be deepening a divide that would be better served in an opening up a dialogue about the issue of women priests. I don't what to do to help. I thought a large delegation of support for Fr. Bozek from all over the country might help. Perhaps prayer for and another letter to the Bishop would help. As Well as prayer for and another letter of support for Fr. Bozek to the local newspaper would help. I just hope this doesn't grow into a split in the church. What would happen if excommunicated Catholics kept practicing there faith? If there was a problem with sacramental documents they could always returned to the servants of God who gave them those documents to receive future sacraments. Then continue to attend mass and receive communion, confession and other sacraments where documents aren't required in other Catholic Churches. What are they going to do excommunicate you again for practicing your Faith?
I'm just wondering if Archbishop Burke is drawing an unnecessary political line in the sand? What's going on? Is this where the line is being drawn? What if we ignore the line and go on Loving and Worshiping God and one another as Jesus taught. And being sagacious as serpents and as gentle as doves, sidestep the Bishop's challenge?
May the Peace of Christ and the Love of God be with us and Fr. Bozek and ArchBishop Burke. :-)
Archbishop Burke
c/o The Catholic Center
4445 Lindell Boulevard
St. Louis, MO 63108
Or you may write a letter of support for Fr. Bozek to the local newspaper at: letters@post-dispatch.com
The more we discover how much we are Loved by God, the more we want to do God's Will
Joer, I've been following
Joer, I've been following this story in some detail on my blog. Here's some more updates. According to Father Bozek his canon lawyer will be Fr. Tom Doyle. Fr. Doyle is best known for his work in the abuse crisis, and I was ecstatic to read he would be Bozek's canonical atty. Also Archbishop Burke has excommunicated the two new members of St. Stanislaus's lay board, which gave him 5 excommunications in one week. He most definitely seems to be drawing a line when it comes to obedience to the hierarchy. I too, think this may be a mistake.
colkoch.blogtoolkit.com
Thanks Col. Nice site. I
Thanks Col.
Nice site. I didn't find the Fr. Bozek thread yet (just glanced so far) but I'll see it soon.
God bless you Col!
The more we discover how much we are Loved by God, the more we want to do God's Will
Women’s roles need to be
Women’s roles need to be defined by women.
AnneD this is an excerpt from a post I made a while back to B7M8 whom I believe holds a position similar to yours.
You wrote:" Let US make man in OUR image. "
In Genesis 1:26-27 Women and Men created in God’s image - it says:
“Then God said, ‘Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness…So God created humankind in God’s image, in the image of God s/he created them; male and female God created them.”
Here's the excerpt. As much as Mary and Joseph portray The Holy Family. Women's roles today will expand from nurturing the family of the basic all important home family unit to nurturing the family of humanity... the family of God. Just as the Virgin Mary as Co-Redemtrix of our Church does today, She leads today's women to partake in her expanded service to all of humankind. Amen/Awomen.
Howdy B7M8 and AnnieO! Long time no post.:-) I hope you don’t mind a little intrusion here. I just had something to say to B7M8. I like your openness and willingness to discuss issues. I hope perhaps a little fresh opinion backed up by Pope’s comments could maybe add to your perspective a little bit. You both are people I admire. B7M8, I don’t know how to format so I’ll put your questions in quotes.
“I always feel helpless when I hear the anger and frustration of those who see women as oppressed by the Church. I’d like to look at this a different way because it is clear that there is a sense of injustice which drives your arguments and others”.
Good.
“Can we agree that men and women are different?”
Yes
“Not that one is better than the other, but just different?”
Yes
“And that the differences are not just superficial but are deeply part of who we are?”
This is where there is divergence. The Female expression of God on Earth has been stiffed for thousands of years. So the profundity of the Female Expression of God on earth remains to be seen. As it is achieved the depths of both male and female personalities will become more profound.
“Are gender roles always wrong?”
When the female gender roles are defined by male leaders they are not permitted to express the feminine genius as proclaimed by the Pope John Paul II. Women must define their own roles because Males don’t have the capacity based on the different you professed to what women are or are really capable of by virtue of their gender.
“What about fatherhood and motherhood?”
When defined by woman will gain new depths in parenting.
“Aren’t they essentially different but equal roles?”
Different yes. Equal no. Congruent yes. Equivalent in importance of self-definition and self-determination. Different in manner of expression.
“Can a father breastfeed his child?”
Can a father know a mother’s nurturing instincts?
“Does that make him less of a parent than the mother?”
Only when he doesn’t allow the necessary self-expression and self-determination of the feminine aspects of their co-creative parenting pairing.
“What about the non-physical roles mothers and fathers play in their children’s lives?”
Equally impaired by the male restricting and lack of understanding of the feminine expression of their co-operative efforts.
“Aren’t there differences there, too?”
You bet cha. And we (males) need to accept the women need time and space to evolve and develop their feminine expression and influence on the world sphere of influence. From the very personal level of the family unit right on up to making the guiding decisions of the world as heads of world governments with our full male support. Even if we don’t get it because we’re not women. Than and only than will the playing field between men and women begin to become level.
I mean I’m not saying anything the Pope’s haven’t said. Just the words are different the meaning is the same. They both basically say women must define themselves and the Church has to give their self-definition just consideration. Check out this excerpt from an old thread:
http://ncrcafe.org/node/378
What do you think about these comments from the Popes as they relate to women’s vocations in the Church?
In "MULIERIS DIGNITATEM" JOHN PAUL II says the following:
CONCLUSION
If you knew the gift of God
31. "If you knew the gift of God" (Jn 4:10), Jesus says to the Samaritan woman during one of those remarkable conversations which show his great esteem for the dignity of women and for the vocation which enables them to share in his messianic mission.
The present reflections, now at an end, have sought to recognize, within the "gift of God", what he, as Creator and Redeemer, entrusts to women, to every woman. In the Spirit of Christ, in fact, women can discover the entire meaning of their femininity and thus be disposed to making a "sincere gift of self" to others, thereby finding themselves.
During the Marian Year the Church desires to give thanks to the Most Holy Trinity for the "mystery of woman" and for every woman - for that which constitutes the eternal measure of her feminine dignity, for the "great works of God", which throughout human history have been accomplished in and through her. After all, was it not in and through her that the greatest event in human history - the incarnation of God himself - was accomplished?
Therefore the Church gives thanks for each and every woman: for mothers, for sisters, for wives; for women consecrated to God in virginity; for women dedicated to the many human beings who await the gratuitous love of another person; for women who watch over the human persons in the family, which is the fundamental sign of the human community; for women who work professionally, and who at times are burdened by a great social responsibility; for "perfect" women and for "weak" women - for all women as they have come forth from the heart of God in all the beauty and richness of their femininity; as they have been embraced by his eternal love; as, together with men, they are pilgrims on this earth, which is the temporal "homeland" of all people and is transformed sometimes into a "valley of tears"; as "they assume," "together with men, a common responsibility" "for the destiny of humanity" according to daily necessities and according to that definitive destiny which the human family has in God himself, in the bosom of the ineffable Trinity.
The Church gives thanks for all the manifestations of the feminine "genius" which have appeared in the course of history, in the midst of all peoples and nations; she gives thanks for all the charisms which the Holy Spirit distributes to women in the history of the People of God, for all the victories which she owes to their faith, hope and charity: she gives thanks for all the fruits of feminine holiness.
The Church asks at the same time that these invaluable "manifestations of the Spirit" (cf. 1 Cor 12:4ff.), which with great generosity are poured forth upon the "daughters" of the eternal Jerusalem, may be attentively recognized and appreciated so that they may return for the common good of the Church and of humanity, especially in our times. Meditating on the biblical mystery of the "woman", the Church prays that in this mystery all women may discover themselves and their "supreme vocation".
…With these sentiments, I impart the Apostolic Blessing to all the faithful, and in a special way to women, my sisters in Christ.”
Just as Pope John Paul II prays “the Church prays that in this mystery all women may discover themselves and their "supreme vocation".
Well they have found it for today’s day and age and they will continue to find their "supreme vocation" in the ages to come. And the current Pope we so generously praise gives us our invitation to discussion and review of the issue of the needed change in woman’s roles in the church in his first speech. God Bless him indeed.
Excerpts.From the Pope’s first speech:
BENEDICT XVI, A POPE OF CHRIST, COMMUNION, COLLEGIALITY
VATICAN CITY, APR 20, 2005 (VIS)
"Theological dialogue is necessary. A profound examination of the historical reasons behind past choices is also indispensable."
"The current Successor of Peter feels himself to be personally implicated in this question and is disposed to do all in his power to promote the fundamental cause of ecumenism."
And just as Pope Benedict applies this idea of necessary dialougue and examination to ecumenism so to can it be applied to The Role of Women in the Church.
God Bless You Anne D. May the Spirit of God guide us in our Faith and Action. :-)
Your brother in Christ, Joer
The more we discover how much we are Loved by God, the more we want to do God's Will
The role of man and woman in
The role of man and woman in the Catholic Church is revealed in the lives of the Holy Family. " God sent forth His Son, born of woman, to redeem us, so that we might receive adoption as sons."
God Has entrusted His greatest and most precious treasures, His Children, to their parents. Jesus was entrusted to Joseph and Mary together and in relationship.
Joseph was head of the Holy Family, guardian and defender of Mary and Jesus, protecting them from all mortal danger. Pope Leo XIII, explained that Joseph was the lawful and natural guardian of the Holy Family in his God ordained role as father. In Joseph, we find the true and authentic human virtue of fatherhood. Jesus, the son of a carpenter, from His birth in Bethlehem, the exile into Egypt, and later in the town of Nazareth, was protected by His father, Joseph. The words that Mary spoke to the twelve-year-old Jesus in the temple take on their full significance as explained by Holy Pope Benedict, when she says: "Your father and I...have been looking for you." From the beginning, Joseph and Mary accepted with the obedience of Faith, their fatherhood and motherhood over Jesus.
It is Mary, in her role as mother, who carries the Word within her, preserves and nurtures Christ to completion. Mary as obedient, humble, servant. Mary as wisdom, the intercessor through her Son, Jesus Christ. Mary at the Miracle of Cana, when she says, " Do whatever He tells you." Holy Pope Benedict explains to us that Mary was and is and will remain a mother. " At Pentecost, Mary is in the midst of the praying assembly that, by the Spirit's Advent, becomes Church." The Words of the Crucified to His Mother and to His beloved disciple in the Gospel of John," Son there is your Mother, and Woman, there is your son", confirm Mary as Mother to all humanity in what Holy Pope Benedict refers to Christ's Last Will and Testament. Mary, who with maternal care, becomes a sign of Hope for all of us.
Through the example of the Holy Family, we see God's intention for the role of fatherhood and motherhood.
" Let US make man in OUR image. "
It was never God's intention to make the role of man and woman, husband and wife, mother and father, son and daughter, brother and sister, brothers in Christ and sisters in Christ, priest and nun, anything but a perfect complement. We are called to live our lives in Loving Relationship with one another in Communion with Him, God, the Blessed Trinity. This is what God intended. Believe in Him. Trust in Him.
Anne, I keep mulling this
Anne, I keep mulling this post over and trying to figure out why it bothers me so. I think it's the garbled way in which it engages scripture that gets to me most of all. Mind you, I realize that in responding to you, I'm addressing long-cherished hagiographical traditions that represent how many Catholics engage the scriptures regarding the infancy narratives, and it seems impossible to nudge people to critical thinking, once hagiography has gotten hold of their reading of scripture. Still, surely we have to try? Isn't that precisely why the church has us read the gospels over and over and break the Word at each Eucharist?
Here are some points I would encourage you to think further about. If the Holy Family is so very central to God's revelation and plan for humankind, why do we have infancy narratives re: Christ ONLY in the gospels of Matthew and Luke? For the writers of the gospels, those stories don't seem to have been the central point. The death and resurrection of Jesus were the central point, and the stories of his birth are written in Matthew and Luke to point to that--not to create some ideal model of family life.
If Joseph is The Model of The Father, why would God leave us in the dark so much about this mysterious figure, who hardly makes an appearance even in the infancy narratives? An absentee father? I don't remember the words you use--guardian and defender--ANYWHERE in the gospels.
What clearly seems (to me) to be going on in these hagiographical interpretations of the infancy narratives is an imposition of somebody's idealized notion of "the" masculine role--protect, defend, bring home the bacon--on the Holy Family. We're not being led by scripture in this hagiographical interpretation. We're imposing our cultural ideals on scripture.
And they seem noxious to me, I have to say honestly. Noxious because the idealized interpretation always has women subordinate to men, at the same time that it idealizes female complementarity. Men guard, defend, bring home the bacon; women nurture, feel, bring up the children, keep the home fires burning. There is a huge disparity there in the description of how families are organized and held together. The woman does the bulk of the real work.
As Frannie has so aptly noted, add to this whole tradition the doctrinal teaching that Joseph and Mary never knew each other sexually, and you have a downright bizarre depiction of family life in the Holy Family. That is, if you sit down and read the texts carefully and then think about them. If you don't just take some cultural ideals that you cherish as the heart of Christianity--though they have little or nothing to do with the essential revelation of Christianity--and impose on the text.
Male-female, the complementarity of men and women, of nuns and priests (!), the subordination of women to men, family itself: these simply are not the focus of the scriptures, as I read them. The gospels are a lot more antithetical to middle-class nuclear family life than otherwise. And if we're going to use the Trinity as an example of communion and relationship, and if we think carefully about that, we are going immediately to wade into another slough of problems, since we keep insisting on viewing the three persons of the Trinity as male.
Better, it seems to me, to rethink all of this in light of good exegesis, sociological tools that help us better understand gender and family, and fresh re-reading of the scriptures to ascertain what truly is important in them.
William D. Lindsey
...The role of man and woman
...The role of man and woman in the Catholic Church is revealed in the lives of the Holy Family. "
Probably the most striking aspect of their marital relationship, what sets them apart from most other providers and nurturers, is that their marriage was sexless. Is this God's ideal for marriage?
And Mary, in her role as mother, as she gestated the Word within her, was the first to turn bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ.
With all due respect,
With all due respect, Frannie, Mary was not the Creator of Jesus, she was the one who preserved and nurtured Him from the Womb. The Womb, as we all know, was created by God to protect Life during the most delicate stage of development. ( The definition of living: moving, growing, responding to its' environment )
William, I am sorry that you continue to "mull" over my post regarding The Holy Family. All of what I have stated regarding the Holy Family is True. I feel nothing but sorrow from reading your reply. I am sorry that you do not respect the fact that through the example of The Holy Family, we see God's intention for the role of Fatherhood and Motherhood, the role of a Holy Family. God chose Joseph and Mary to be the parents of His only Son, entrusting Jesus to their care.
Anne, I hope that this has
Anne, I hope that this has been a good Easter for you and your family. I'm sorry that my response to you caused you to feel "nothing but sorrow." I have continued to mull over your reflections on the Holy Family, and have, in fact, made this issue the subject of a posting on my blog, which is more extensive than anything I could post here. If you continue to be interested in this dialogue (in which I don't have a lot more to say than I have said here already--my blog posting simply expands on what I say here), my blog posting is at http://bilgrimage.blogspot.com/2008/03/christians-of-late-have-invested-great.html.
I'm curious about why you put the word "mull" in quotation marks in your reply to me. I used that word with deliberate care to describe my response: etymologically, it's related to mill. I take the replies of others seriously, when I post on this or other posting boards, and I do tend to mull the replies in the mill of my mind, trying to understand the viewpoints of others, which are so different from my own.
May Easter blessings be with you and yours,
William D. Lindsey
Problem: I, for one, can't
Problem: I, for one, can't be 'adopted as a son.'
Just so you know, Annie O,
Just so you know, Annie O, 'adopted as a son' is refering to Christ's relationship with God the Father as a Son in the Flesh. Christ was fully HUMAN and fully DIVINE. He came to show us how to live our lives in relationship with the Father, The Blessed Trinity, God. This gift is offered to all of us who desire to be Children of God.
Anne, I do understand that
Anne, I do understand that the Church offers us many images and metaphors to help us spiritually; since you used quotation marks but no citation, I am just assuming that you are speaking for the church. Obviously, it is sometimes hard for women to know how to be engaged with male metaphors, which was my point.
"Adopted like a son" does suggest that access to all the power, privileges and wealth of the father be given to the adopted son like a birth son as experienced in Biblical times, and is very expressive of God's unconditional love for all of us. And so I do take it. I do accept that one way to engage is to be grateful for the exceptional blessing of being given all of that, and yet, as a woman, I can't help but feel that there is something false about reaching for a male metaphor when it is offered and pulling myself back when it is not offered; it seems as though my access to the power and privilege of the Father is conditional in the Church. So, even while I carry that beautiful understanding, I just don't see it expressed in the Church's life the way you do. I see it more these days in the secular world, where I do have access to some of it; in the world, I have to work extra hard to get to it, that's true, but then again, I don't seem to feel that it is offered so unevenly or conditionally. But please know that I actually accept deeply the meaning of the metaphor, and do know God as the One who privileges me in ways the Church can't control.
I do pray that that changes in the life ahead for others in the church, male and female alike.
Here's an Update from a few
Here's an Update from a few days ago on the Priest (Fr. Bozek) Supporting Catholic Women
Yesterday, more than 250 people in St. Louis and thousands of Catholics like you across the United States started Lent a day early. You turned to God in prayer, standing with Fr. Bozek and his support of women's equality in the church. Thanks for all who participated in prayer during Fr. Bozek's meeting with Archbishop Burke.
Archbishop Burke did not agree to the reconciliation offer that Fr. Bozek shared with him. Now, another meeting has been set for March 5 in which contents of a file that the archdiocese has kept on Fr. Bozek will be shared with him. You can send a letter of support for Fr. Bozek for the file by mailing it to:
Archbishop Burke
c/o The Catholic Center
4445 Lindell Boulevard
St. Louis, MO 63108
Or you may write a letter of support for Fr. Bozek to the local newspaper at: letters@post-dispatch.com
In the meantime, during this Lenten season, may we all continue to turn toward God in prayer for a peaceful resolution in St. Louis and for justice for all who are marginalized in our church today.
The more we discover how much we are Loved by God, the more we want to do God's Will
I've just read the latest
I've just read the latest issue of NCR and its report on Fr. Bozek.
I have to say, I wonder if his coming to this Polish parish is among the miracles that we should attribute to the Holy Pope John Paul II in his canonization proceedings.
After all, Bozek is a Polish priest, born and bred. He grew up living his Catholicism in a climate in which he and his family endured severe oppression for doing so. His father's murder may well be due to their refusal to hide their devotion.
Bozek heard the call of a parish hungry for the Eucharist, and he went there. He puts the needs of the people of God ahead of his own personal safety or comfort.
So what's wrong with this picture: a priest with a history of great devotion, molded in the church that formed John Paul II, hears the call of the people of God, hungry for the Eucharist. And he's punished for responding to that call.
If we could figure out what is wrong with the picture, perhaps we'd have the key to what's wrong with our church right now--to the question of why one out of three Catholics has walked away.
I write from a diocese (Little Rock) where there's tremendous turmoil going on right now, because our diocesan administrator chose recently to replicate a letter Burke has sent his flock two years in a row in St. Louis. It forbids Catholics to support the annual Komen Race for the Cure, which gives big, big bucks to Catholic hospitals in Arkansas, and which has been strongly supported by Catholic parishes.
Women needing a cure for breast cancer, Catholics supporting this cause, since Jesus went about healing and doing good.
And now Catholics reprimanded for this support.
What's wrong with this picture? Holy John Paul II, pray for us.
William D. Lindsey
"Women needing a cure for
"Women needing a cure for breast cancer, Catholics supporting this cause, since Jesus went about healing and doing good."
Jesus funding PP (despite abortion being linked to breast cancer...), wouldn't be doing good.
++++++
What I'm Pondering...
"Jesus funding PP (despite
"Jesus funding PP (despite abortion being linked to breast cancer...), wouldn't be doing good."
HT, is that true that abortion is being linked to breast cancer? I never heard that one before. I have difficulty in believing it, since my mother had breast cancer and never had an abortion!
I want to know who is saying that abortion causes all breast cancers?
From what I've read it's
From what I've read it's about 1% of their budget, and basically intended for breast mamographies for women who can't afford them. PP has the infrastructure and community visibility to help with this effort, but again they recieve a small portion of the monies set aside for breast screening and cancer detection. In some respects, this seems like a case of throwing the baby out with the bath water.
colkoch.blogtoolkit.com
"Jesus funding PP (despite
"Jesus funding PP (despite abortion being linked to breast cancer...), wouldn't be doing good."
That's the thing, Here Today: in our state, Race for the Cure does not give to Planned Parenthood. This is what makes it strange (to say the least) that our diocesan administrator has told Catholics not to support Race for the Cure.
But let's imagine that some of our charitable donations do end up providing support to an organization like Planned Parenthood.
Does the new assertive Catholic identity movement now require us to parse every penny we give, to be sure that not a cent given to any good cause ends up supporting things we deplore as Catholics?
If so (and, actually, I think it's not at all bad to ask questions like this as we donate), will our new assertive Catholic identity bishops kindly provide a list of ALL the organizations to which we ought not to be giving our pennies by donations to organizations affiliated to them? E.g., will they list organizations that support corporations producing chemicals that end up being used in warfare? Or organizations that exploit cheap child labor in developing nations?
Why single out Planned Parenthood? Are we as Catholics not concerned about a much wider range of ethical issues? Are we to stop supporting attempts to heal breast cancer on the ludicrous ground that breast cancer is caused by abortion?
Once start down that purist path, and where do we end up?
William D. Lindsey
What is the link between
What is the link between abortion and breast cancer? Do we no longer heal breast cancer because someone said it might be punishment for having had an abortion?
Diocese rescinds statement
Diocese rescinds statement on involvement in Komen fundraising events
By Catholic News Service
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (CNS) -- Msgr. J. Gaston Hebert, administrator of the Diocese of Little Rock, has rescinded a February statement that discouraged parishes and schools in the diocese from supporting fundraising activities for Susan G. Komen for the Cure.
The international organization, which is based in Dallas, raises millions annually for the detection, treatment and research of breast cancer. One of its signature events is the annual Race for the Cure held in communities around the country.
After meeting with Komen officials, Msgr. Hebert said March 6 that the earlier position statement, prepared by the diocesan Respect Life Office and endorsed by him, "was based upon what were believed to be 'facts,' which upon further study have turned out not to be true."
He said one of the erroneous "facts" he was given was that the national Komen foundation provides grants to Planned Parenthood, a major provider of abortions, raising concern that money donated to Komen in Arkansas could indirectly fund abortions.
"However, the reality is that the national Komen foundation does not give grants to Planned Parenthood -- and, therefore, money given to Komen in Arkansas does not, even indirectly, fund abortion," he said in his March 6 statement. "Thus, my major reason for releasing the position statement was not valid."
"It is important that the stance of the Catholic Church always be based upon truth," Msgr. Hebert said, adding that the earlier position statement "was based upon unintentional error."
"To let that statement stand would be an act of injustice," he said. "With apologies to Komen, to those fighting breast cancer and to the survivors, to the Catholic clergy and faithful who were embarrassed by this mistaken policy, I rescind the position statement in its entirety."
* * * *
Msgr. Hebert also said the earlier statement implied a link exists "between procured abortion and increased risk of breast cancer" and that Komen dismisses such a link. The statement cited two researchers who have done work in this area.
But "the National Cancer Institute states that there exists no link between abortion and breast cancer," Msgr. Hebert said. "The preponderance of scientific research states that no such link exists, but there is a minority opinion that insists that such a link exists."
Also claimed in the earlier statement is that Komen endorses embryonic stem-cell research, which the church opposes, he said, but it in fact funds adult stem-cell research, "which would be in line with Catholic moral teaching."
"I will state very plainly, after meeting with the Komen officials of the Arkansas affiliates, that these are good people highly dedicated to finding a cure for breast cancer and preserving life; this is their only goal," Msgr. Hebert said.
END
Dennis Coday, NCR cafe management
Thanks Dennis. I did
Thanks Dennis. I did research the topic on my own on the internet. ( I simply searched Komen and Planned Parenthood ) I think Msgr. Hebert should speak to Eve Sanchez-Silver, who apparently was on the board of the Komen Foundation and resigned. He should also read the articles on the internet and perhaps contact those mentioned to determine the validity of their statements.
P.S. William, I did go to your bilgrimage blog spot. I noticed that on March 15, you quoted from the Catholic Catechism. I am happy to see that you are aware of the Catholic teaching on this issue. Peace.
As someone who lives in the
As someone who lives in the diocese of Little Rock, anne, I find it admirable that Msgr. Hebert would consider the evidence, and then retract his statement when he discovered it was based on incorrect information.
It's sad to me, as a Catholic, that pastors sometimes refuse to retract misinformed pastoral statements, when confronted with information that proves what they have said is incorrect. I admire any pastor who can say that she or he is wrong, when she or he has been proven wrong.
Thank you for affirming my knowledge of the Catechism. If I am not mistaken, the Catechism also contains quite a bit of information about how we must not bear false witness against our neighbor. A weblink I have just visited after reading your message--a Colorado Media Matters discussion of an interview given by Eve Sanchez-Silver--states that Ms. Sanchez-Silver falsely claimed in her interview that abortion increases the risk of breast cancer. The web article states that the National Cancer Institute has not found such a link. The link is at http://colorado.mediamatters.org/items/200609280005.
Is this correct information, do you think--that is, what Colorado Media Matters is reporting? If so, it troubles me that anyone seeking to diminish the number of abortions (and I consider that a goal worth pursuing) would think that it we should rely on medical misinformation to pursue that goal.
As I've said in other postings, it seems to me that if we want to convince others to join us in trying to eradicate abortion (and the need for abortion), we must develop sound, persuasive arguments based on correct information. I find it not only unconvincing when people try to use a purported abortion-breast cancer link to develop opposition to abortion. I also find it morally troubling to imply--in any way--that women suffering from breast cancer, who may have previously had an abortion, don't deserve our compassion, or our attempts to heal breast cancer.
Surely we can oppose abortion without limiting support and funding for the worthy cause of eradicating breast cancer! In trying to make political gain out of this purported link, the religious right is making people think that its adherents are callous to human suffering.
We must, I think, let our yea be yea and our nay be nay, as we battle for good causes. Duplicity does not serve moral ends. These, too, are points I seem to recall emphasized in the Catholic Catechism.
William D. Lindsey
http://www.abortionbreastcanc
http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/ABC_Research/index.htm
++++++
What I'm Pondering...
I went to the link. Wow.
I went to the link. Wow. Can you synopsize your conclusions from reading each and every or even just a good proportion of the cited resources? OR do you just like the length of the list, because it is impressive.
However, I did myself a little google search and this is what I found:
This is a fact sheet from the National Cancer Institute:
http://www.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/abortion-miscarriage
It reports that studies do not reveal the link:
Here's a report from a large study done by Harvard:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/24/health/24canc.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1205784276-fKmsj1ubwVhPFuEPrKsE7Q
It also fails to report a link.
***
Let me tell you HT that PP emphasizes the education and prevention end of things far more than they do the abortion end of things though they recognize abortion as part of the spectrum of women's health care.
Can we agree on this? Perhaps the best reason to not engage in irresponsible sexual behavior including intercourse is that it prevents you from having to face heart wrenching choices--like feeling shoved into a marriage OR single parenthood OR stunting your and your partner's education endeavours OR abortion. I think those are wrenching decisions for anyone at any age to make.
I sent a reply the other day
I sent a reply the other day on this, but it has not posted. I went to the website above regarding the supposed link to abortion and breast cancer. It's unclear from that website what the study was, how it was conducted, and so it is difficult to understand the study that was conducted to arrive at any firm conclusion.
This does not appear to be a comprehensive or scientific study and it would be preposterous to form an opinion or supposed "truth" from it.
Really people, I appreciate
Really people, I appreciate all the hard work that went into the army of strawmen, but....
I never suggested that we don't try to treat Breast Cancer, I pointed out the irony of Komen supporting PP. I did not suggest it was a punishment for sin, but a biological consequence of increased risk (similar to the effect of smoking and lung cancer or promiscuous sex and STDs).
Here Today, I don't think
Here Today, I don't think you're hearing the point people are making in response to what you said--which was, precisely, "Jesus funding PP (DESPITE ABORTION BEING LINKED TO BREAST CANCER...), wouldn't be doing good" (my caps).
The point, I think, is that people are sick to death of the gotcha politics of the religious right, whether the Catholic right or the evangelical right.
Why even bring up the (bogus) link between abortion and breast cancer if you don't intend for us to think about that link--and in the context of what Jesus approves or disapproves?
If you want to convince people that certain practices are immoral, you have to use good arguments, based on sound evidence. Tampering with scientific evidence is just not good argumentation, and when Catholic thinkers in league with the religious right do that--whether re: abortion, sexual morality, stem-cell research, or whatever--they make it appear that the church has really nothing by way of sound argumentation to offer society.
This means that the church's ultimate moral stance becomes, Do it because I told you to do it; don't do it because I told you not to do it. The church that defies reason and sound evidence to coerce belief undercuts its own central ethical claims--namely, that it is offering us ethical analysis premised on natural law and reason.
When we talk about natural law but either ignore what science tells us about nature, or twist the data to fit our pet theories, or deny facts that all respected authorities in a field have long since verified, we end up with a theory of natural law that has nothing to do with nature itself. The Catholic church has long claimed that its point of contact with a broader culture in a pluralistic society is natural law and reason: we claim that we have something to offer the public square because we aren't forcing folks to accept our religiously-based ethical claims, but because our ethical claims appeal to a law written in all human consciences.
People who believe in this approach, who value reason and sound ethical argumentation, are getting sick to death, I submit, of the special pleading of those on the right, whose central anti-abortion arguments now become a spurious link between breast cancer and abortion, or who challenge homosexuality on the ground that it causes early death!
I'm not suggesting that sound moral arguments can't be developed against abortion. I'm just proposing that those arguments have to be based on facts and good scientific evidence, insofar as they appeal to science. To be convincing in the public square in a pluralistic society, they also have to be respectful of others, of the give and take of dialogue--not always popping up with gotcha arguments and proof texts to try to silence others and stop the conversation.
When we behave that way, we give the impression that what we really want to do is coerce others to accept what we believe, to act and think as we do.
A church whose primary impulse, faced with pluralistic society, is to try to coerce, to hammer, to bludgeon into conformity, seems to have given up hope.
I grow very, very tired of the gotcha politics of the religious right, because I'd so sorely like to hear the churches preaching hope to the world for a change, not condemnation and hell and sickness as a punishment for sin!
William D. Lindsey
hmm, considering that I
hmm, considering that I haven't found time to post on this thread since March 6th I wonder how you know that I am not hearing others' points, made over the past 2 weeks?
There have been studies both supporting and denying a link between breast cancer and abortion so the "bogus" term really is a failure of sound argumentation. (Not to mention such a loaded word would be harmful to a sound argument even if it were entirely true...) You would think that an organization aimed at eradicating a form of cancer would look at all the evidence for and against a link before making a decision, but they do not.
You are the one who failed to mention the reason that there have been issues with supporting Komen (ie that they give money to an organization opposed to a de fide teaching of the Church*) When the fact was raised to the attention of the diocese that Komen gave no money to PP in Arkansas, what was the response, again?
Note that you are the one who implied that the Church was arbitrarily opposing women, in particular breast cancer research. This is a failure of good argumentation, if only from a lack of research. 'Gotcha' politics would indicate that the reasons for such a decision were secret, not published in a letter and distributed to all parishes and schools.
Again, the Church isn't asking for blind obedience when they publish a position paper giving the reasons for what they are asking.
If you want a church that does not teach about hell and comdemnation, you can be assured it is not Christian, let alone Catholic, but I wish you well nonetheless.
++++++
*see humanae vitae & evangelium vitae (sorry I am not at home so no direct reference)
Here Today, I hope that this
Here Today, I hope that this Easter season is a blessed time for you and yours.
I have noted before that silence is, in my view, a sign of disrespect for others. To receive the words of others in silence negates the humanity of others. It implies that a piece of furniture and not a human being, with rich human depths, has spoken.
So I want to acknowledge your words, and to let you know they have not fallen on deaf ears. I am trying to understand them.
At the same time, I am weary of argument, when argument is simply a chess game in which one always tries to checkmate or vanquish the other. There's too much to be done in the world at large, to play such games (in my view).
It seems tragic to me that you and I (and we in some respects stand on different "sides" politically and ecclesiologically) seem unable to find any common ground in which to talk fruitfully with each other. After all, I think we both share a concern to see our culture live according to more humane norms. And we share a concern to see the church play a vital role in transmitting its values to culture.
Meanwhile, one of the lessons I take from Easter is that Christ lives in my life and yours, and that of the world. And I gain hope from the confidence that this means that even a sinner such as I can walk with Jesus, in the hope that he will continue to remove the blinders from my eyes. Thank you for walking that Emmaus journey with me, and for sharing your thoughts with me--as well as for all you do to work for a more humane society in which the church's core values play a role.
William D. Lindsey
You are so persecuted! And
You are so persecuted! And while I'm sure that we all appreciate how involved you are in concerns about the prevention and treatment of breast cancer, what if not ever being pregnant increases the risk of breast cancer? What can we draw from that for single women who don't marry or have children, or religious women?
I went to the website, but
I went to the website, but there is no explanation next to the bars, so it is difficult to get an accurate reading on their study. The page also did not go into detail about specifics of the testing itself. If you are presenting this as scientific evidence of a link to breast cancer and abortion, it is not convincing. But, again, it is unclear from what is shown. I would have to look at more studies and get more details before I presumed to know of such a link. There might well be other factors that are contributing to breast cancer that are not included in the study. I would also want to know who funded this study.
However, despite a link or without a link this is no reason to not help in discovering cures and supporting organizations that are attempting to do so. More research needs to be done to get rid of cancer, all types of cancer, whatever the cause. I would hope that you would agree on this, for my mother and all the women who have breast cancer.
P.S. Suggesting that people
P.S. Suggesting that people "earn" an illness through sinful behavior is not a Catholic value. All deserve healing, sinners and saints alike.
William D. Lindsey
"As he went along, he saw a
"As he went along, he saw a man blind from birth. His disciples asked him, 'Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?'
'Neither this man nor his parents sinned,' said Jesus, 'but this happened so that the work of God might be displayed in his life. 4As long as it is day, we must do the work of him who sent me. Night is coming, when no one can work. While I am in the world, I am the light of the world' " (Joh 9:1-5).
Mark's summary of Jesus's ministry: "He went about healing the sick and doing good."
William D. Lindsey
Since I reported on the
Since I reported on the recent announcement of the administrator of the Little Rock diocese, Msgr. Hebert, prohibiting Catholics from participating in the Race for the Cure this year, it's important for me to issue an update.
Today's Arkansas Times newspaper reports that diocesan officials have met with the Komen Foundation and rescinded their previous statement, since it was based on erroneous information that the Komen Foundation gives grants to Planned Parenthood.
Msgr. Hebert's retraction statement may be read in full at www.arktimes.com/blogs/arkansasblog/2008/03/komen_back_in_running.aspx#more.
As it states, "However, the reality is that the national Komen foundation does NOT give grants to Planned Parenthood – and, therefore, money given to Komen in Arkansas does NOT, even indirectly, fund abortion. Thus, my major reason for releasing the position statement was NOT valid."
Msgr. Hebert also notes, "Our statement implied that there exists a link between procured abortion and increased risk of breast cancer and that Komen dismisses that link. The National Cancer Institute states that there exists no link between abortion and breast cancer. The preponderance of scientific research states that no such link exists, but there is a minority opinion that insists that such a link exists."
And now we are free to continue to walk with Jesus, as we try to go about healing the sick and doing good.
William D. Lindsey
Fr. Bozek has broken his vow
Fr. Bozek has broken his vow of Fidelity to Christ's Church. He has neglected the needs of the people of God. It has been recently reported that the Komen Race for the Cure has given money to Planned Parenthood. I wonder what their explanation is for this?
Thanks, I am very happy to hear that the Komen Foundation does not support Planned Parenthood.
From what I have since read
From what I have since read on the internet, it appears that the Komen Foundation does support Planned Parenthood. It appears that some of the branches of the Komen Foundation are not aware that some of the other branches are supporting Planned Parenthood. I wonder why Komen Race for the Cure gives money to Planned Parenthood? Their funds should only be going to help find a cure for breast cancer.
Fr. Bozek is not neglecting
Fr. Bozek is not neglecting the needs of the people of God; the Bishop is though. Fr. Marek Bozek is doing what Jesus Christ did and ministering to the outcast and those deemed unworthy to receive the sacraments by the Pharisees and doing the Will of God. Fr. Bozek is fulfilling his vow of Fidelity to Christ. He is like the Jesus in the Gospels, if you'd take the time to read it and actually get to know who He Truly is and who His Father is. Your alliance to spirits that are contrary to the Spirit of Truth is a lack of Fidelity to Christ.
He has not broken his vow,
He has not broken his vow, he is living it, and this is the cost of discipleship.
I got this update on Fr.
I got this update on Fr. Bozek on 4/11/08
I pray that things work out for him and that he stops getting persecuted for supporting his brethren in their calling. I pray the Archbishop stops presecuting his sheep. Amen.
--------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 15:47:49 -0500
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: Update on Priest Supporting Catholic Women]
At this point, Fr. Bozek plans to stay with his parish but find another
bishop under whom he may take shelter (all priests are under the
jurisdiction, so to speak, of a bishop so he is seeking the jurisdiction
of another bishop at this point). It seems that as long as his
parishioners support him, they should be fine.
Thanks for your support.
Many blessings,