Warning, Roy Bourgeois

The Maryknoll priest, Roy Bourgeois, best known for his crusade against the School for the Americas (SOA) recently participated in the ordination of a woman at a liturgy. Not just participated, liturgically speaking, but a bit more. Bourgeois before:

I consulted a lot of friends, I’ve done a lot of discernment, spoken with a lot of women friends. I felt in conscience — this matter of conscience keeps coming up and I don’t know what other word to use — if I didn’t attend her ordination, I would have to stop addressing this issue as I do.

Bourgeois after:

I have no intentions of participating in a similar ceremony in the future. The next step now is to move ahead.

The Maryknoll head and General Council send their report on to Rome, but the matter appears to be over. I’m sure the angry in our midst will be disappointed, but …

About these ads

About catholicsensibility

Todd and his family live in Ames, Iowa. He serves a Catholic parish of both Iowa State students and town residents.
This entry was posted in Church News, Ministry. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Warning, Roy Bourgeois

  1. FrMichael says:

    Maryknoll gets not a dime more from me or my parish if something isn’t done about him.

  2. Liam says:

    I have to say I am surprised that anyone might be surprised that one who has taken vows of obedience in the Church or who is employed by a diocese is subject to discipline for deliberately consenting to the invalid simulation of a sacrament, especially Orders or the Eucharist. That’s DEFCON 1 territory for the Church, the kind of thing it is quickest to discipline. It’s not like a question of moral theology with lots of room for gray. Sacraments are pretty black-and-white things, and designed to be so for the protection of the faithful from confusion.

    I would say to expect more and faster and deeper discipline if the simulation of ordinations continue.

    I also will say such simulations are one of the surest ways to ensure that legitimate questions about the teaching on male-only priesthood will not be addressed. Which is sad. This agitprop route is a spiritually violent dead-end.

  3. Hello

    Just wanted to alert you to this article also regarding Maryknoll Father Roy Bourgeois:

    Maryknoll priest receives canonical warning over role in ceremony

  4. Dale Price says:

    Irony alert: the women involved are subject to excommunication, and the male concelebrant gets a warning.

    All righty, then.

  5. Liam says:

    Dale

    Well, there may not be quite as much irony – he’s so far responded to a kind of summons (though not yet of the canonical kind) and has apparently said he would not do it again. Had the women involved responded to their canonical summons and repented, I doubt they would have been excommunicated.

    The question will be more neatly put if he ends up being subject to a full canonical process – that may or may not yet develop. But I expect it will severer canonical action is more likely for such as he in the future if this situation arises again.

    Now, I recall a situation where there was a canonical issue involving a religious priest and religious sister, where the former encouraged the latter to go beyond what was licit in the administration of sacraments. She was disciplined and removed from her then current ministry but not banned from ministry in the diocese; his faculties were removed. I thought that was correct insofar as relative penalties as between them – his delict was the graver.

    Here, however, a priest could not be simulating ordination himself (he’s not a putative minister of the sacrament), so the issue here is putative concelebration with non-ordained persons – the sacrament of the Eucharist might have been valid but illicit (who knows the details at this point), whereas the women clearly participated in invalid simulation of Orders and (so far as they tried to concelebrate the Eucharist) the Eucharist. Again, deliberate invalid simulation of such sacraments is what is most likely to draw canonical lightning bolts.

  6. Charles R. Williams says:

    Has he admitted his error publicly? Has he apologized to the church? Does he affirm the teaching of Inter insignores (sp?)? It’s not just a matter of not doing it again and “moving ahead.”

  7. Liam says:

    Well, Charles, you and I are not in charge of canonical processes, so none of us gets a vote, as it were.

  8. Dale Price says:

    Liam:

    Good points, and I suppose the matter isn’t fully over until Rome takes a look at it.

  9. Dianna Morton says:

    I thank Father Roy for taking a stance against the PATRIARCHY that the Catholic Church has abided by since its creation.

    The embedded values of women as being inferior in God’s plan is clearly evident in the Adam and Eve creation myth.

    This is not the word of “God” nor “Jesus” but of HUMAN MEN whose soul purpose was to
    control the thought and actions of the population.

    Dianna Morton

  10. Pingback: Roy Bourgeois Fallout « Catholic Sensibility

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s