Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Challenging the Old Boys Network in the Vatican
We never thought it would end up on a hard wooden bench inside a police station in Piazza Cavour. Maryknoll priest Fr. Roy Bourgeois, young Erin Saiz Hannah of Women’s Ordination Conference in the US and Miriam Duignan from Womenpriests.org from the UK were sitting there when my wife and I arrived. They were being detained by the Rome police.
It started when the Rome police spotted the three women in long white church liturgical garments robes, the man in a roman collar dressed all in black, and their supporters walking several blocks down the middle of Via della Conciliazione directly towards the Vatican, the headquarters of the institutional Roman Catholic Church and the Basilica of St. Peter.
The group sang Alleluias and carried a long purple banner Ordain Catholic Women, a big red and white banner proclaiming God is Calling Women To Be Priests” (in English and Italian), and a black and white Call to Action banner
The group wanted to deliver a petition, printed on pink paper, signed by more than 15,000 people who asked the Vatican not to expel Fr. Roy Bourgeois, 72, from the church for saying that women are called to be priests in the church. Fr. Roy faces expulsion from his Catholic community, Maryknoll, for refusing to recant his belief that women can and should be allowed to become priests. Bourgeois, a decorated Vietnam veteran, has been a faithful member of the Catholic missionary group, Maryknoll, for 44 years. For twenty years, he has worked with School of Americas Watch in the US, a group of thousands who challenge the role of the US military in training human rights abusers among Latin American militaries. Along with the petition was a list of hundreds of priests who asked that Fr. Roy not be expelled just for speaking out about a matter of conscience.
As the tour busses and other traffic veered around the marchers, pedestrians on the street cheered. The huge dome of St. Peter’s Basilica dominates the area which is thronged with pilgrims and tourists, and saturated with souvenir shops and vendors selling religious medals, holy cards, statues, refrigerator magnets, flags, and postcards.
The police presence quickly outnumbered the group and stopped them as they tried to enter Vatican Square.
Protests were not allowed in the Vatican said the police. But we are here to deliver a petition, the group responded. But you are carrying signs said the police. We can put the signs down responded the group. But the women are dressed like priests and that is a protest the police insisted. But we are legitimately ordained priests they told the authorities.
After much back and forth with Vatican authorities the police said Fr. Roy could go into Vatican Square because he was a real priest. When Fr. Roy insisted all the priests, men and women, should be allowed to enter, an undercover policeman violently grabbed the banners away from those peacefully holding them and the authorities arrested Fr. Roy, Erin Saiz Hannah who the police decided organized the event, and Miriam Duignan, who was acting as the translator.
Erin and Miriam were jammed into a police car and with lights flashing and sirens blasting were taken away. Fr. Roy was taken away in another police car.
After several hours’ detention inside the Rome police station, the three were released after they signed statements promising to return to Italy if the investigating magistrate decided to try them on the charges of protesting without a permit. The banners were seized as evidence and not returned.
As the three were released from police custody to cheers from the rest of the group gathered outside the police station, the group insisted the petitions must still be delivered. Ultimately they were delivered to high ranking church official who promised to consider them.
So, who were these people?
Three of women who marched alongside Fr. Roy in priestly garb are members of Roman Catholic Women Priests, an international group of more than a hundred ordained Catholic women priests, deacons and bishops from the US, Austria, Canada, France, Germany, Latvia, Scotland, South Africa, and Switzerland. Priests Ree Hudson from St. Louis, and Janice Sevre Duszynska a priest and Deacon Donna Rougeux of Kentucky marched.
The organizers of the march were Women’s Ordination Conference, Call to Action and the international Womenpriests.org. Erin Saiz Hanna and Kate Conmy were there representing Women’s Ordination Conference, a group of thousands of Roman Catholics in the US who have been advocating for women priests since 1974. Nicole Sotelo and others from Call to Action, a 25,000 member organization of Catholic lay people, religious, clergy and bishops working for justice inside and outside the Catholic Church, were present. Therese Koturbash and Miriam Duignan from Canada and the UK represented Womenpriests.org a website in 26 languages with more than 1.5 million visitors annually. Dorothy Irvin, a world renowned biblical scholar, theologian and archeologist shared historical and archeological support for the presence of women priests in the early church. Others who needed to remain anonymous to retain their jobs joined is as well.
The group ended their Roman pilgrimage with a simple rooftop liturgy presided over by the women priests. Bread and wine were shared as people sang “Here I am, Lord.” In the background, the sun was setting both on the great dome of St. Peter’s Basilica and the men inside who think only they run the institutional church.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...



56 Comments so far
Show AllA solution for these protesters, quit this church. Join the human race. Join the 21st century. Join the world of thought.
I strongly disagree.
It is their Church as much as anyone else in the Church. They do not have to quit it. They can remain and continue to work for renewal and reform.
You are as mistaken as much as the protesters are. The Church is not a democracy but a privately run for profit organisation whose business is selling hope.
The catholic church has done immeasurable harm to the human race - both physical and mental. The Vatican is another powerful corporation. Occupy the Vatican!
You call that a protest? A real protest would be a complete rejection of this outdated, psychotic outfit. It's incomprehensible to me that women want to become priests in the Cath. church -or the military, for that matter. Both organizations are historically antithetical to anything female. The link between church and military is no accident.
There is a unique hobby horse to ride. Ordained, female, Catholic priests in the military - as chaplains I assume, not as combatants.
It is time for the Church to make the change.
I don't recall jesus ever making a fuss about sexism. It was all feed the poor and rebel against the bankers and authority.
So unless the banners read Vatican should feed the poor, or Vatican should not be bankers, or vatican should not have authority I'm not interested.
Feeding the poor and being anti-authority was only part of his message; repenting and growing in love for God was the rest of it. One cannot have true respect for Jesus without recognizing him as the Son of God. That's why the "I like Jesus but not his followers" sentiment is a lie. Remember, when Saul persecuted Christians, Jesus asked him why he was persecuting HIM! Only by accepting the full message of Christ can we truly follow him.
There's also this: In Luke 14:26 Jesus said, “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters-yes, even his own life-he cannot be my disciple.”
John 14:16: "Jesus answered, 'I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me'." Kinda lets the Budhists, Hindus, Shintos, and agnostics like me out. I've always heard that phrase in my mind's ear with the first word of the sentence and the last in italics, emphasized -- maybe with him waving both thumbs at himself and saying, "Ya wanna make something of it?"
I don't really want to argue religion in CD, so I'll not do it. I'll just affirm that many of us Christians understand that passage to not mean belief in Jesus is the only WAY but Jesus himself is the WAY as incarnation of the TAO and thus we do not believe that only Christians, those who believe in Jesus, are connected to the Divine but that all who are connected, from any religious tradition (including non-believers who define the ultimate reality in non Theistic terms) are connected via the TAO and we just believe that Jesus is the TAO incarnated. I don't mean to argue that one must agree with us; rather only affirm that is what many of us Christian Universalists believe.
Are you saying that the works and words of Jesus would have no value if he was not the son of god?
R.J. Diler. We're all the children of "god". Would an acorn follow another acorn to be an oak? Of course not. Every seed automatically knows The Way. In the same fashion, all people know The Way.... LOVE. We do not follow others to get to the next life. We must only follow love. (Note: Jesus tried to the end the Moses business, got killed for it, and then others turned him into a new and better whorehouse. But the only thing they could all agree on was putting him above us, so they could be above us in his absence.)
Dave,
God is love [charity] (1 John 4:16). This is the title of an encyclical by Pope Benedict XVI (Deus Caritas Est). The relationship with a loving God is what makes Christianity so powerful. We are indeed all the children of God, but Christ was as clear about repentance as he was about love and forgiveness. It takes two parties for love and forgiveness to be exchanged, and acknowledging our sins is our role in this process. God's love and forgiveness are infinite, as is our propensity to sin.
PS: The oak/acorn analogy is good because it shows the errors of Protestantism. Catholicism is the true apostolic Church and its teachings are guided by the Holy Spirit.
In Christ,
"R.J."
You’re so brainwashed it’s painful to listen…
THE BIBLE IS NOT THE WORD OF GOD
Thomas Paine, one of America's founding fathers, explains the falsehood of bible authority better than I can. The following words, paraphrased and abridged, are drawn from a letter he wrote to a friend, and also from his book The Age of Reason, which was the most controversial book in history for 60 years, until Darwin's Origin of the Species.
"You cite quotations from the Bible, which you call the word of God, to show my opinions on religion are wrong. However, I could give you as many quotes from the same book to show yours are wrong, so the Bible settles nothing as it decides any way we choose. But by what authority do you call the Bible the “word of God?” This is the first point to be settled!
It is not your calling it so that makes it true, any more than Muslims calling the Koran the “word of God” makes that true. Popish councils voted the books that now comprise the New Testament to be the “word of God.” This was done by yeas and nays as we vote a law. They rejected some, voted others doubtful, such as the books called the Apocrypha, and those books which had a majority of votes are presented as God’s official word.
The Pharisees of the second temple selected the books that comprise the Old Testament, which is also represented to us as God's official word.
And this is all the authority there is, which is no authority at all. I am as capable of judging for myself as they were, and even more, because they made a living by their religion, so they had an interest in the vote they made.
It is said in the Bible that God spoke to Moses, but how do you know? Because, you say, the Bible says so. The Koran says that God spoke to Mohammed, do you believe that too? No. Why not? Because, you say you do not believe it. And so, because you do, and because you do not, is all the reason you can give for believing or disbelieving, except that you will say that Mohammed was an impostor. And how do you know Moses was not an imposter? As for me, all are impostors who pretend to deliver instructions from God.
That bloodthirsty man, called the prophet Samuel, makes God say, (1 Sam. 15:3), “Now go and smite Amalek and utterly destroy man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.” It is blasphemy to believe that God decreed it. All our ideas of the justice and goodness of God revolt at such impious cruelty. It is not a God, just and good, but a devil, under the name of God, that the Bible describes here!"
Paine's logic is irrefutable. And as for his book The Age of Reason (note there are two major parts and one minor), it should be required reading for anyone who proselytizes. See for yourself why Thomas Jefferson loved him like a brother, or why Abraham Lincoln said "I never tire of reading Paine." Then take a copy to your clergyman and watch the discomfort.
When it gets right down to it, priestcrafters make a living serving their neighbors in ways the rest of us do for free. This by itself is not wrong, as some people have no one else to call. But make no mistake, anyone who has subjected themselves to be ruled by love has all the religion they need.
You are clearly not receptive to the Christian message and I don't think there is much else I can say.
I pray that the gift of faith may be bestowed upon you.
In Christ,
"R.J."
“You are clearly not receptive to the Christian message and I don't think there is much else I can say.” THANK GOD!
You are no receptive to rational, logical thought. You are not receptive to independent thinking and questioning.
Says who? Has anyone talked to the holy spirit? Or do they just claim that they have?
Morticia always a woman hating woman. So sad for you.
What the hell are you talking about now?
stop feeding the war between the sexes
Reading the headline I can't help but think that it's the "young boys' network" in the Catholic church that's most in need of challenging.
Sorry, but I just couldn't resist.
LOL.. And yet horrifying in its truth.... Body of Christ... get on your knees before the old men in women's clothes... call them master... kiss their hands.... close your eyes... open your mouth.... body of Christ.... I speak for GOD...
It is a lot like advocating for gays in the military. There's this entity that needs to stopped entirely but many who should be working toward that end are instead trying to make it more representative. Oh, if only slavery had been more inclusive, if only Wall Street were more representative, that would solve all our problems.
How pathetic.
The Roman catholic fascist-loving imperial sadism is just too important to these people's lives for them to walk away.
If these people really believed in the supposed teachings of Jesus, they would not need to belong to any religion which hoards money and oppresses.
The only difference between Catholics and Protestants (Baptists, Eternal Church of Christists , etc.) is that with the former you can always blame the pope whereas with the latter you only get to raise the pitchforks against the local pedophile minister.
Overall this is an excellent piece.A small group of courageous people, one of them a 72-year-old priest, make a non-violent frontal assault on the Vatican, a place that was once a literal brothel, a place that remains a metaphorical brothel.
Fr. Roy Bourgeois, and the women with whom he demonstrates and acts, have earned the respect of millions around the world by doing jail time (sometimes hard time), sometimes facing death, always having their careers and integrity challeneged by "their own," as well as others. This takes no small bit of courage and all of them pay an extremely high personal price to struggle with progressive popular movements in the US and elsewhere.
I would respectfully ask one thing of Prof. Quigley, who also has made his bones many times over as a lawyer for the people and progressive activist: please consider eliminating the phrase "Fr. Roy" from your public writing. While I know that it's meant to be a term of respect, it is often used a term of deference, especially by Catholic girls and women who are too frequently conditioned to see their pastor, bishop or cardinal as their human superior.
"Fr. Bougeois" retains a sense of respect for the person and recognition of his office. A little thing maybe, but in this context, I'd argue it is an important little thing.
Solidarity,
TJ
I would argue that the bigger "sin" would be to leave the Church in the hands of the male hierarchy ...
Most, of not all, of the commenters here equate the Church with the misogynists who run it. For some of us there is considerably more to it than that ...
It is another example, IMO, of the ease and flippancy with which the "solution" of so many to so much is "just chuck the whole damn thing" ....
"Most, of not all, of the commenters here equate the Church with the misogynists who run it."
Sorry, but it is. High on J2P2's agenda was deep-sixing the notion of a "pilgrim church" in which the laity had a voice. And he succeeded.
Nope, they are not equivalent in my mind - sorry about that, and your saying they are is just as "dogmatic" a statement as so many these guys make. They rule the Church Militant, but not the Church Triumphant - which phrase i know will be lampooned and ridiculed ad nauseum. There is too much in Church tradition which taps into some very fundamental archetypes of the human psyche that survives, not because, but more in spite, of them. The biggest blind spot in the CC is its attitude toward sexuality - from that just about all of the abuses and misguided "teachings" stem. For those who have no use for religion, this attitude is quite enough to condemn the institution as a whole, but for those who have examined it a bit deeper - there is a baby in all that bath water - that I choose not to abort. Choice is the key here ...
You err. I'm not making a dogmatic statement; I'm only reflecting Vatican policy under the current and previous Pontiffs. Another pontiff like these two, and the laity will know its place once and for all: mouths shut and wallets open.
If I may rephrase myself a bit extremely: When the laity have the power to excommunicate the Pope, get back with me.
"You err" - interesting choice of phrase - that's what they say to "heretics", which i, undoubtedly, am ....
"I'm only reflecting Vatican policy under the current and previous Pontiffs."
And my point is that "Vatican policy" is not co-terminal with the definition of the Church
You apparently believe that the decisions of the "governing body" are what define an institution and if that governing body is not democratically elected then the entire institution is bogus, not so? You may be right about the latter, although the same thing could be said of any educational institution, but I do not agree at all, at all, with the former ....
"You apparently believe that the decisions of the "governing body" are what define an institution"
That's pretty much the definition of "governing body." Now tell me: What power do the laity have in overturning rules and rulings made by Holy Mother Church's governing body? The laity's role **isn't even advisory.** Now as for whether the institution is bogus, that depends, does it not, on whether that institution has a divinely-granted right to define morals and eschatology? And not on its commitment to "democracy." Few people conceive of their god(s) as being democratic, and certainly not when it comes to shared governance with mortals. Of course, if the god(s) in question don't exist, then I suppose "bogus" would be a fair conclusion.
See, here's the problem, as i see it, you keep confusing the icing with the cake - Those "rules and rulings" are the trappings but not the essence - they are laid down to cement their power base. Just out of curiosity, were you raised Catholic? I count myself Catholic, but i do not believe in the "infallibility" of the Pope, nor in certain other "dogma" laid down by these guys. The irony, IMO, is that much of the underlying human archetypes that form the basis of much of the ritual of the Church are subtly subversive of that hierarchy and they don't seem to realize it.
So is your problem with the Church the particular activities of the hierarchy, the lack of democracy, or just the concept of God, per se?
Hi Aquifer. I am interested in the archeypes you are referring to. Truly.
There are archetypes that hold deep resonance for human beings. That doesn't mean it isn't time for an evolution of archetypes. They do outlive their innate juice or energy after a certain amount of historical/psycological time. Also, from my own non Catholic upbringing, but having been close to many who are intimately part of the Church, i have had many a long and deep discourse on these matters.
It seems to me that if there was as much substance in the archetypes, as there are schizophrenic and delusional beliefs systems in this organization, then it would have evolved into a profound source of open mindedness, inclusiveness, original thinking, courage, would not support a 'just war' policy, would not try to control womens' bodies, would not require celebacy of clergy, would not use fear of punishment as a tool of control, and on and on.
I am surely not condeming all who profess to be Catholics. You must realize this.. But it is quite clear that, as i have said since i was a child, "If i never saw the Ten Commandments, i still wouldn't want to kill someone." It is wired in. And Catholics who do social justice work.....I have a feeling they would have done it if they weren't Catholic. No one told me to do what i do. Not at all. It is who i am.
I will stop here. I am honestly not attempting to be in the least bit hostle. I am just sharing some thoughts i have had for a long time. The Nicean Council. You must know about that, i know.
Peace, rita
I understand where you are coming from, I think - we have had this conversation before. I know this sounds like a cop-out - but I would be hard pressed, 2 fingered typist that i am, to try to "flesh out" what i mean in this format. I hesitate to "simplify it" for presentation here, because frankly if I do, I realize i would have to spend a good deal of time in exposition, but having opened the subject, I feel I need to say a bit more.
I think I came to this feeling after reading a good deal of Joseph Campbell, a "lapsed" Catholic, I do believe, who understood the underlying concepts behind so much of Church "doctrine" and ritual - perhaps an example, and an answer to the fellow who questions my "belief", is the extraordinary doctrine of transubstantiation whereby bread and wine are "turned into" the body and blood of Christ - I think Catholics are the only denomination that is supposed to take this literally. Amazing - that obviously makes all recipients cannibals .... but it follows from the very ancient "meme", if you will, that the way to incorporate someone's strength or spirit was, literally, to ingest them.
"It seems to me that if there was as much substance in the archetypes, as there are schizophrenic and delusional beliefs systems in this organization, then it would have evolved into a profound source of open mindedness, inclusiveness, original thinking, courage, would not support a 'just war' policy, would not try to control womens' bodies, would not require celebacy of clergy, would not use fear of punishment as a tool of control, and on and on."
That's is what I keep thinking - that if the Church knew the incredible legacy of human development it had accumulated over the centuries in its sacraments and rituals, it could be a wonderful resource. What the Church did over those centuries was try to co-opt "pagan" or indigenous feasts, celebrations, cycles and ideas. It didn't do it to preserve the fundamental concepts or archetypes embodied within them, but it did just that, IMO, inadvertently - the idea of cycles as opposed to linearity, etc.
I don't think the Church knows what it really has - it has overlaid so much with it's dysfunctional concept of sex which leads to all the other travesties that happen with male dominance in power structures that it doesn't realize that, ironically, IMO, certain of it's traditions preserve, not form, mind you, but preserve, the very seeds of the human psyche. In other words, the Church has some valuable concepts in it, not because of, but in spite of, its hierarchy ...
OK folks, so have at it - I expect to be "crucified" ...
RTT, I wish there was a way to have a one on one - I am a phone person, back and forth, question and answer, point and counterpoint - not something I know how to do in this format ....
Catholicism differs from Protestantism because it is not democratic (Mt. 16:18). Its truths do not change with the ages as do the "doctrines" of the various non-Catholic denominations. Papal infallibility exists because our Church is guided by the Holy Spirit.
Aquifer, do you reject Christ's giving of the keys to the kingdom of heaven to St. Peter (Mt. 16:19)?
If so, do you also reject the true presence of Christ in the Eucharist (Lk. 22:19)?
In Christ,
"R.J."
oops, double post ...
I do feel an irrational sympathy for these principled, brave, good-hearted, well-intentioned dissenters. "Irrational" because I regard the Church, like the Democratic Party, as structurally corrupt beyond redemption.
I suppose the movement would argue that if only an appropriate number of Old Girls were admitted to the Old Boys Network, this would precipitate profound ripple effects that might ultimately cause the hierarchy to reform itself out of existence.
"As if"-- pardon the skepticism.
I do wonder about the philosophy of beating their collective heads against the basilica's stone wall-- as opposed to, say, more confrontationally nailing up a list of theses on the door.
And my guess is that the overwhelming majority of the hierarchy, and a plurality of the faithful, are appalled, or simply coolly contemptuous of, the protestors' bold and vaguely sacriligeous appropriation of priestly garb, and their "unauthorized" mimicry of the sacrament of the Eucharist.
But I wish them luck in spite of myself, even if they are making Baby Jesus cry.
Women's ordination would not be such a problem if so many of the women's groups were not pro-choice and/or pro-gay marriage.
The fact that so many atheists/agnostics/humanists want the Church to change is proof that it should STAND ITS GROUND!
Remember modernism is the synthesis of all heresies!
Your first paragraph is delusional; the rest, merely amusing.
My first paragraph is accurate in that it describes the state of the Catholic Church in America. Catholics for Choice, for example, advocates for direct violation of Church teaching on abortion and contraception. Many pro-choice and pro-contraception Catholics view women's ordination favorably. Since they clearly have promoted anti-Church views in one way, why should they be trusted on other fundamental issues. Liberal Modernist Catholics have turned Catholicism into a man-oriented religion, though it belongs centered on Christ and the laws of God.
I sincerely hope for the conversion of such hearts to the faithful teachings of the Church. If you are reading this and are doubting your faith or God's interest in your life, please do not despair. I used to hold anti-religious views that many of you may have. With discernment of God's will and a thorough examination of my conscience, my family and I have found true peace and love in the practice of God's laws. I am no closer to God than any of you who might be reading this message and thinking that I'm speaking as if sinless.
The Fatima Prayer
"O my Jesus, forgive us our sins. Save us from the fires of hell and lead all souls to heaven especially those in most need of thy mercy. Amen."
In Christ,
"R.J."
To paraphrase the odious Grover Norquist: by all means let the Church "stand its ground" until it's small enough to drown itself in a baptismal font.
Pope Benedict XVI has spoken about this issue many times. He proposes that believing Catholics should see themselves as a creative minority; one that may have to become smaller in the coming years (or decades, or centuries) in order to retain its orthodoxy, morality and distinction from the secular world.
In Christ,
"R.J."
Stand its ground? Modernism is heresy? Stand its ground and continue to burn witches? Stand its ground and have religious wars? Stand its ground and continue to oppress, subjugate and despise women? Or place them on high pedestals so they are unable to be human? A crass market in the vatican where they sell fridge magnets, mugs, etc. What would Jesus say? I think he is rolling in his grave to see how his teachings were perverted by self-serving power-hungry old men wearing dresses, silly hats and jewellry diddling little boys (they usually are repulsed by women). Forcing native Canadians to become white and cruelly punishing them for what they are. Tearing them away from their families and shredding their identity leaving life-long, generational scars manifesting in alcoholism, etc.
The chuch does not represent the word of God. Men have perverted and twisted the bible, which is not necessarily the word of God either. I believe in a God - but not all this other rubbish.
Another thing that annoys me about Catholics. They think they have invented and have a copyright on ethics and morals. HA !! Look how much they have contributed to suffering, self-hatred, etc.
I know many who were not brought up in a church and they somehow (miraculously !!! wow!!!) are innately kind, generous, considerate; they volunteer to help the less fortunate, they share, they are honest and have integrity; they instinctively live a good life and are kind and believe everyone is worthy and has value. They are open minded and live their lives with love. A person does not have to be "religious" to be a good person.
When "religious" people perform good deeds, they are self-serving with selfish ulterior motives - to win brownie points with God and Jesus so they get to go to heaven. People who are not religious, do kind deeds with no ulterior motives. I think the latter is more genuine.
you can't lump all religious people in together
you can't lump all non-religious people together
and you can't assume motivation, you don't know because you can't read their minds
That's true. You're absolutely right. I'm generalizing but those are my thoughts from my personal experience with religious people and humanitarians who are not religious.
it's been my experience that belief or non-belief has little to do with it
it's character
Maybe what you are seeing, and what I have seen myself, is that those who TALK most about being christian or about being spiritual are least likely to act kindly.
church and state...what a goddamned one-two punch...
the time to punch back is coming...