French Catholic woman illicitly ordained

Reuters ^ | July 2, 2005 | Catherine Lagrange

[Tax-chick]

Bunch of goofs.

[Tax-chick]

The proponents of priestesses seem to be invoking an "ordinary magesterium of the Church," and I've no idea what that means.

The "ordinary magisterium" is what has always been accepted and taught as the Catholic faith, even if there's not a specific 180-proof Papal proclamation about it. Rejecting the Ordinary Magisterium became popular when the liberals decided to dissent from Humanae Vitae. They insist that only a declaration of dogma, like the declaration of the Immaculate Conception or the Assumption, is "infallible."

[InterestedQuestioner]

Thanks, TC!

It would seem then, that the ordinary magesterium agrees with Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, as it's a document backing up 2000 years of Church practice. It sure seems odd to invoke the Ordinary Magesterium under such circumstances.

[TheGeezer]

The only connection to the Catholic Church is the word "catholic". What these voodoo women do is not sacramental, priestly, or religious. It is political. It takes place well "outside of and apart from the Catholic Church".

One might employ too many lay extraordinary ministers at Mass: that would be illicit. One might have a "faith pep talk" inserted into the mass at the epiklesis: that would be illicit. One might even have wierd liturgical dance incorporated into the Offertory procession, and THAT would be illicit. None of these would result in an invalid Eucharist.

This incident is not illicit. It is goofy.

[Tax-chick]

the ordinary magisterium agrees with Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, as it's a document backing up 2000 years of Church practice

Yes, exactly. Perhaps the people you're talking with are confused about what "ordinary magisterium" means. They might have heard the term used in discussions of Humanae Vitae, and decided that it means "how we justify rejecting Catholic doctrine while still calling ourselves Catholic."

A somewhat related idea, Sensus Fidei (consensus of the faithful), can also be misused in these matters. This is the concept that the traditional beliefs of the Catholic people can be a stronger source of truth than the speculations of theologians ... stick with the "tried and true."

However, liberals distort this idea into "opinion poll theology," suggesting that if they persuade enough people to accept an error, like contraception or women's ordination, then the error becomes truth because many people believe it.

[InterestedQuestioner]

TC, this is a big help.

What is written below comes from the women's ordination site, http://www.womenpriests.org/pquest2.asp
--------------------------------------------------------------
"The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has declared this to be infallible doctrine"


" Infallible, heh?
The ‘ordinary and universal magisterium’ refers to the combined teaching of all the Catholic bishops in the world. But the combined episcopate has never taught this doctrine.”

"It may be that all bishops of the world hold this as their opinion of faith. This is known as an opinio communis (common view).
Opinio communis means nothing in terms of Church teaching."

Five conditions are therefore required:

1. Collegial action.
It is clear that the bishops must be involved in an exercise of teaching authority as one body.

2. As ‘judges’.
The bishops must be free to express their own considered opinion.

3. In service of the faith of the whole Church.
The bishops must listen to the Word of God and the ‘sensus fidelium’.
Regarding faith and morals.

4. The teaching must concern matters relating to the object of faith.
In a teaching consciously imposed as ‘definitive’.

5. The bishops must want to impose the doctrine as definitely to be held.

None of these five conditions have been met!”

-----------------------------------------------------------------
TC, It seems to me that ordinary laypeople such as myself are being called upon to wade through technical arguments relating to this issue, sometimes by chaplains or religious in the employ of the Church. Most of us have no training regarding these issues, I personally have no idea if the jargon they use is BS, or refers to legitimate questions. It seems though, that if their argument were true, that it might invalidate the Nicene creed, as I've heard that some bishops subscribed to the Arian heresy.

[InterestedQuestioner]

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=903632&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312


Not to be mean, but looking at the picture, it looks like a chromosome count may be in order. If it turns out that the individual in the middle does indeed posses a surreptitious Y chromosome, perhaps this could be laid to rest. Instead of reading about "a Catholic woman was ordained a priest," this would be seen for what it is, a pathetic delusion.

[Tax-chick]

The ‘ordinary and universal magisterium’ refers to the combined teaching of all the Catholic bishops in the world.

This is a deliberate misstatement, intended to give the impression that everything is up in the air, forever. The Ordinary Magisterium includes the catechisms, the documents of ecumenical councils, the statements issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and other sources. It is not an opinion poll of Bishops. Bishops are the custodians of the Deposit of Faith, not the authors.

You'll also see in their #3 how they telegraph their distortion of "sensus fidelium," just as I predicted above.

As an ordinary layperson myself, as well as a convert to Catholicism, I've experienced the same confusion when apparent "authorities" in the Church offer conflicting teaching. Read the Bible and the Catechism, over and over. Check some of the Catechism footnotes - all the sources are available on the Internet, if you Google diligently. Hold fast to what the Pope teaches; he cannot teach error on faith and morals.

And then there are my personal "smell tests." Does a theological "challenge," such as women's ordination, seem to have its roots in power politics and self-promotion? Reject it! Do its proponents shout "Not Fair!"? That's it for them. Is the "innovation" in the service of sexual libertinism? Get a grip, folks. Is the idea "this world" focussed, like socialist economics or environmental extremism? Forget it.

We lay people can read and comprehend the sources that are available to us, and (assuming we're FReepers :-), we have common sense. We don't have to be intimidated by self-appointed authorities.

[Tax-chick]

What a DOG!

[Salvation]

Just sent this to Our Lady's Warriors.

[Salvation]

**"It doesn't say anything about who "ordained" her. A self-ordination?" **

I was wondering the same thing.

[Salvation]

InterestedQuestioner
Since Jul 2, 2005

Troll?

[Tax-chick]

He/she is carrying on a sensible discussion, with every impression of being a faithful Catholic. James hasn't noticed anything outre', and he's rarely wrong. Every new poster isn't a troll :-).

[Tax-chick]

Richard Wurmbrand tells a beautiful story about a group of seminarians in Soviet Russia who went to the grave of their martyred Bishop and prayed for ordination by the Holy Spirit. Of course, they were Protestant.

[Khurkris]

..<=="COMFORTABLE SHOES ALERT !!!"

[gbcdoj]

The confusion here is this. There are actually three different levels of magisterial teaching authority:

1. Extraordinary Magisterium: As defined by Vatican I for Popes, and also applicable to Ecumenical Councils. These are 'definitions' of the faith, such as Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (No ordination of women), Ineffabilis Deus (Immaculate Conception), and the Tome of Pope St. Leo (Two natures in Christ). To fall under this, the following conditions must be met (as defined by Vatican I's decree "Pastor Aeternus"): "when the Roman Pontiff ... in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority ... defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church, he possesses ... infallibility". "Defines", according to the official explanation given to the Fathers at the First Vatican Council, means that the Pope makes it clear that such-and-such an opinion is his certain judgment on the question:

"Rather, the word 'defines' signifies that the Pope directly and conclusively pronounces his sentence about a doctrine which concerns matters of faith or morals and does so in such a way that each one of the faithful can be certain of the mind of the Apostolic See, of the mind of the Roman Pontiff; in such a way, indeed, that he or she knows for certain that such and such a doctrine is held to be heretical, proximate to heresy, certain or erroneous, etc., by the Roman Pontiff. Such, therefore, is the meaning of the word defines."

2. Ordinary Authentic Magisterium. These are official teachings of the Pope or Pope and bishops which are not proposed as definitively certain. Vatican II explains it in the following way: "In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent. This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will" (Constitution on the Church, 25). Because these teachings can sometimes be in error, it is permitted to dissent from them, according to the teaching of many theologians and the responses of the Theological Commission at Vatican II on the meaning of the quoted text, although not however publicly.

3. Ordinary and Universal Magisterium. This expression was first coined by Pope Blessed Pius IX, in the letter "Tuas libenter". It refers to teachings which the bishops of the whole Church have approved, either by explicit teaching or by approbation of the books of theologians, as definitive. It will be best to give his words on the matter: "For, even if it were a matter concerning that subjection which is to be manifested by an act of divine faith, nevertheless, it would not have to be limited to those matters which have been defined by express decrees of the ecumenical Councils, or of the Roman Pontiffs and of this See, but would have to be extended also to those matters which are handed down as divinely revealed by the ordinary teaching power of the whole Church spread throughout the world, and therefore, by universal and common consent are held by Catholic theologians to belong to faith."


A lot of confusion has been spread about the doctrine of infallibility. It should be considered in the following way: whatever the rulers of the Church (that is, the Pope, or the Pope and the bishops together either in council or dispersed) impose a doctrine on their subjects to be held as certainly true, that doctrine is infallibly taught. There is no other coherent way to account for the idea of infallibility.

If you are interested in reading a rather extensive technical discussion on all of this, I recommend the following link:

http://www.rtforum.org/lt/lt43.html

which is an article by the Rev. Brian W. Harrison, O.S., M.A., S.T.D., who is a Professor of Theology in Puerto Rico. He explains the doctrine of papal infallibility quite clearly from the original sources.

[InterestedQuestioner]

Thanks TC, this is a big help.

"As an ordinary layperson myself, as well as a convert to Catholicism, I've experienced the same confusion when apparent "authorities" in the Church offer conflicting teaching. Read the Bible and the Catechism, over and over. Check some of the Catechism footnotes - all the sources are available on the Internet, if you Google diligently. Hold fast to what the Pope teaches; he cannot teach error on faith and morals."

Amen to that, this sounds rock solid. I'll start working on the Catechism, thanks for the advice.

[InterestedQuestioner]

Hi Salvation,

Not a Troll, just a newbie looking for some feedback on this issue. There are some of us who have been taught that women's ordination is an open question, through no fault of our own. Folks lobbying for women's ordination also received a disproportionately large amount of air-time following Pope Benedict's election, as you may recall, and they used the coverage to suggest this is an open question. This has been a bit confusing for some of us who are less well catechized than we might be.

There will be a number of articles later this month about women's ordination, as a group involved in organizing and publicizing these events has scheduled a riverboat "ordination" for July 28 on the Canadian-US border. The will make the claim that the ordination will be at the hands of bishops who were themselves validly ordained by "a bishop in good standing with Rome." (Romulo Braschi, a former Catholic priest now a "bishop" with a schismatic community.) I believe that two of those "bishops" are the women in colorful dress in the photo in this thread.

I'm suggesting that knowledgeable Catholics with a few spare minutes take the time to email or write to news outlets that report any factual inaccuracies regarding this "ordination," and perhaps use it as an opportunity to clarify some issues which the supposed ordinations will intentionally confuse. As I don't count myself among "well-informed" Catholics, I posted a letter to the editors of Reuters, to check with well informed FReepers to see if I had indeed been correct. The comments on this thread have been very helpful, as well as encouraging. Hopefully, seeing a hack such as myself attempt to speak on the issue will motivate a few wiser heads to send a few well articulated and pithy comments to the editor, and thereby reduce the number of our brethren who have been troubled by some of the rhetoric surrounding this issue.

If you have a connection to OurLady's warriors, I'd like to say that that website has been very helpful for sorting through the issue, and is a good source of information.

Other than that, as a newbie, I promise to continue working on my HTML, so my posts are not so boring.

[Tax-chick]

When my husband and I joined the church in 1993, the Catechism had just been published in English. I spent 6 or 8 months reading it through from cover to cover. A simplified version is coming out this year, I think, but the Big Book is readable, if you're prepared to make the effort.

As for being a troll, James, the famous troll-sniffing baby, thinks you're fine. (This is his ZOT picure :-)