Posted on 05/22/2014 3:22:11 AM PDT by markomalley
And P.S. – You’re not a priest.
That pretty much sums up Bishop Paprocki’s response to a local Catholic woman’s recent attempt to get ordained.
The woman in question is Mary F. Keldermans of Springfield. Bishop Paprocki wrote to her last month asking her to reconsider her plan, but evidently she ignored him and tried to be ordained a priest at a Unitarian church on May 5.
Bishop Paprocki promptly issued a decree of excommunication (and if you’ve never seen one of those before, they look like this).
The bishop also issued this statement to his diocese:
Please be advised that Ms. Mary F. Keldermans of Springfield, Illinois, has attempted to be ordained a priest for “Roman Catholic Womenpriests, Inc.” in a ceremony at the Abraham Lincoln Unitarian Universalist Congregation in Springfield on May 5, 2014. As a result, she has incurred an automatic excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See.
That is what you call a bishop who’s not afraid to bishop.
At the same time, we should be careful not to tout this as some sort of righteous smack-down or triumphant display of authority. Bishop Paprocki is much too holy and charitable a bishop for that, and I have no doubt that his declaration of excommunication was issued with sorrow, not pleasure.
But he didn’t hold back from issuing the decree of excommunication either, or from publishing it prominently on the diocesan website.
This is one of the things I love about Bishop Paprocki. Whether it’s standing up for the unborn, for marriage, or for Holy Orders, he doesn’t shy away from confronting those who threaten his flock, nor from explaining his position to them with charity.
He prays intensely, he acts decisively, and he teaches clearly.
Lord, send us more bishops like this one!
Does this make her a legitimate clergyperson of the Unitarian Universalist ... I can't say "faith," because they don't have one ... er ... "organization"?
Just shows how insane this woman is. How in the world does being “ordained” by Unitarians make one a Catholic priest? Nuts.
Yes because Unitarians and Roman Catholics are interchangable (sarc)
Unitarians are a Marxist sect that invite people to speak like sandanista guerrillas. An old college acquaintance who leans way left, brags about how his ‘Religion’ is out to take out capitalism.
You hit upon her solution with your last word. Which is at this time impossible for functional units.
It’s unclear if it was a UU ordination ceremony, or unauthorized Catholic ceremony held at a UU facility.
Can’t believe this sect emerged from the Puritans, the driving force behind the merchant and manufacturing classes who fought against the tyranny of Charles I.
Yes it is.
BTW, them's the rules. Good that a bishop actually enforces them.
CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH
GENERAL DECREE
regarding the delict of
attempted sacred ordination of a woman
In order to protect the nature and validity of the sacrament of order, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in virtue of the special faculty given by the supreme authority of the Church (cf. can. 30, Code of Canon Law), in the Ordinary Session of 19 December 2007, has decreed:
Without prejudice to the prescript of can. 1378 of the Code of Canon Law, both the one who attempts to confer a sacred order on a woman, and the woman who attempts to receive a sacred order, incur an excommunication latae sententiae reserved to the Apostolic See.
If, in fact, the one who attempts to confer a sacred order on a woman, or the woman who attempts to receive a sacred order, is one of Christ’s faithful subject to the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, that person, without prejudice to the prescript of can. 1443 of the same Code, is to be punished with a major excommunication, the remission of which is also reserved to the Apostolic See (cf. can. 1423, Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches).
This decree, once published in L’Osservatore Romano, comes into force immediately.
And yes, the CDF (formerly the Holy Office, formerly the Inquisition) is the dicastery that acts on behalf of the Apostolic See in these cases.
“The excommunication decree states that for remission of the penalty she must appeal to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. I’m a little fuzzy on this but, isn’t that the office of the Inquisition?”
I’m not sure, but there are other acts that incur automatic excommunication as well (such as participation in an abortion). There is a process by which people must be “re-instated”, so to speak.
It's actually refreshing that something in this world is not losing ground to the marauders.
It depends on the "congregation" and the minister. I was in the seminary with one of their ministers and he was uber conservative. there were several of us that had dinner together several times a week and he was always one of the strongest conservative voices.
Yes, Bishop Paprocki should definitely do that!
I think so.
The attending priest (as all Catholic clergy are priests, as you probably know) used to be call the "Devil's Advocate." Now he has a fancier name that I can't remember. But, I"m getting old.
From Google:
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (C.D.F.) (Latin: Congregatio pro Doctrina Fidei), formerly known as the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Roman and Universal Inquisition, from where the names Roman Inquisition or "Holy Inquisition" arose. It is informally known in many Catholic countries as the Holy Office (i.e. Santo Oficio) and after 1904 was termed as the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office. It is the oldest among the nine congregations of the Roman Curia.
Ms. Mary F. Keldermans is suffering from the very first of the seven deadly ones: pride.
Over my many years, I’ve been intrigued with the censure known as excommunication. I remember as a child that if you were divorced and remarried outside the church you were “excommunicated” (at least almost every priest prior to V II would tell the couple that). And after Vatican II, you would occasionally hear about the woman or women claiming to be ordained or “attempting” to be ordained or simply calling themselves Ordained priests, being excommunicated by the local see, as in the case presented in this thread.
A clear example of excommunication is in 1 Corinthians 5:5 and one that I seem to always be drawn to when chatting about the use of this medicinal penalty. The Catholic Encyclopedia defines excommunication as follows: (this is only an excerpt)
“Excommunication (Latin ex, out of, and communio or communicatio, communion — exclusion from the communion), the principal and severest censure, is a medicinal, spiritual penalty that deprives the guilty Christian of all participation in the common blessings of ecclesiastical society. Being a penalty, it supposes guilt; and being the most serious penalty that the Church can inflict, it naturally supposes a very grave offence. It is also a medicinal rather than a vindictive penalty, being intended, not so much to punish the culprit, as to correct him and bring him back to the path of righteousness. It necessarily, therefore, contemplates the future, either to prevent the recurrence of certain culpable acts that have grievous external consequences, or, more especially, to induce the delinquent to satisfy the obligations incurred by his offence. Its object and its effect are loss of communion, i.e. of the spiritual benefits shared by all the members of Christian society; hence, it can affect only those who by baptism have been admitted to that society. Undoubtedly there can and do exist other penal measures which entail the loss of certain fixed rights; among them are other censures, e.g. suspension for clerics, interdict for clerics and laymen, irregularity ex delicto, etc. Excommunication, however, is clearly distinguished from these penalties in that it is the privation of all rights resulting from the social status of the Christian as such. The excommunicated person, it is true, does not cease to be a Christian, since his baptism can never be effaced; he can, however, be considered as an exile from Christian society and as non-existent, for a time at least, in the sight of ecclesiastical authority. But such exile can have an end (and the Church desires it), as soon as the offender has given suitable satisfaction. Meanwhile, his status before the Church is that of a stranger. He may not participate in public worship nor receive the Body of Christ or any of the sacraments. Moreover, if he be a cleric, he is forbidden to administer a sacred rite or to exercise an act of spiritual authority.”
I have seen the use of this censure by various bishops to silence and discipline women who proclaim to be priests or are motivated to seek ordination and claim to be catholic priests; but I have never seen a priest who abused children/adolescents get excommunicated. I find that curious because the offense committed is an abomination.
Somone who knocks on your door for no apparent reason.
Is Unitarian even a real church?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.