English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

.....the newly appointed Catholic bishop of Baltimore saw fit to remove for 'liturgical abuse'. WTF?

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/bal-md.rodricks11nov11,0,7860998.column?coll=bal_news_local_util

2007-11-17 03:28:09 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

12 answers

VINI Vidi Vici, Paul also said we are all of the Royal Priesthood, and that there is no male nor female in Christ. She was under the authority of a male priest. There is a priest I could respect.
My niece had given birth in another state and I rushed to be with her, as her newborn son was in critical condition from many complications. (He is fine now.) A priest came in to give my niece communion, and offered to have me partake. I told him I was not a Catholic. He asked me if I believed that Christ atoned for my sins, and I answered that I did. He said, "We're on the same bus, come on." With no catechism or dogma, I received communion from that priest because he was not willing to exclude a fellow believer, though it could have meant being defrocked. Christians need to get over religion, and become more Christlike.

2007-11-17 05:19:52 · answer #1 · answered by One Wing Eagle Woman 6 · 3 0

In the Orthodox faith, no one but the priest is allowed to give an eulogy at an Orthodox funeral. Others can speak only with the Bishop's permission.

In the Catholic faith, what the priest did was still inappropriate and the columnist made the proper analogy towards the inappropriateness of allowing a female Episcopal priest to read the Gospel vs. the child sex scandals except that the two have nothing to do with each other. The Catholic Church has strayed far away from her own Orthodoxy to allow both of the behaviors to occur.

2007-11-17 08:48:20 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Priests used to be allowed to marry, and Eastern Rite priests still are. Someday, the Latin Rite priests may be allowed to marry, too, but not until the laity of the Church steps up and does a lot of the work. For now, being a priest is a 24/7/365 obligation, and a priest cannot properly care for a wife and kids when he is devoting so much time to the Church. If the laity would do more to help feed the hungry, shelter the homeless, visit the sick, comfort the dying, educate the ignorant, etc., etc., it would be different. Also, there is a financial consideration -- the difference between supporting a priest vs. supporting a priest, his wife and his kids is considerable. Priests are sexual beings, just like the rest of us. They simply offer their sexuality to the Lord, as a sacrifice, and the Lord honors that sacrifice. Sexual activity is NOT a necessity. Many people live without it. Many people SHOULD live without it, such as those who are only attracted to adolescents or children, or those who only have a taste for brutal, violent sex. We all expect sexual deviants to control their sexual appetites. It should be far easier for a mentally healthy person to control theirs.

2016-05-23 23:31:38 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

They can overlook the pope's past as a member of the Hitler Youth, allow priests to abuse parishioners and do their best to hush it up, but when a woman dares to read the Gospel, they come out with guns blazing. Do they really think they are doing their religion service? I am appalled to see answerers on here actually defending the Church; there is no excuse for such hypocrisy.

Mother Teresa's probably rolling in her grave right now.

2007-11-17 04:58:13 · answer #4 · answered by Jack B, goodbye, Yahoo! 6 · 3 0

It sounds like someone is splitting hairs because he has an agenda. That bishop is probably a big fan of the new ultra-conservative pope. Also, everyone who quotes Paul saying why women shouldn't be church leaders ignores what Jesus said about Mary, Martha's sister when she wanted to learn instead of serve.

2007-11-17 05:15:18 · answer #5 · answered by Purdey EP 7 · 1 0

This has nothing to do with any sort of "women speaking at a funeral" business. This has to do with the gospel in the Liturgy of the Word. He could easily have let this Episcopal clergywoman sing the psalm, or read one of the readings. By explicitly having her do the one spot in the liturgy of the word reserved for the deacon, he deliberately designed this proceeding to disrupt the liturgy.

Any priest would be well aware that the gospel may only be read by a Deacon, Priest, Bishop, or a sworn-in lector. That's just how it is.

Since the Catholic and Episcopal churches are not currently in communion, a priest who has received Holy orders we are unable to recognize is obviously not such a person.

Liturgy is important in Catholicism - very important. It is not just some person mumbling words, but the eternal prayer of the church on Earth that moves God's heart to keep the Real Presence of His Son in our tabernacles. Anyone who abuses this can rightly expect there to be something in the way of repercussions.... they'd just have to.

2007-11-17 03:33:31 · answer #6 · answered by evolver 6 · 0 6

that's a good one, twoods........
they can molest little boys and get moved to another part of the world to spread their filth; but don't let a woman (a woman of God) speak at a funeral.......
can anyone tell that the church is a business run by men for men? they can't be too concerned about women or womens' rights.

2007-11-17 04:05:54 · answer #7 · answered by ohmy 4 · 4 0

leave it to the catholics to stir up trouble - again.

i think michael jackson would make a great catholic priest!!

2007-11-17 04:09:39 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

yep most priest still live in the middle ages

2007-11-17 03:31:03 · answer #9 · answered by kev l 5 · 2 0

It says (in Paul I think) I will not suffer a woman to speak in church. We have to obey the teachings, even the ones we don't like

2007-11-17 03:30:43 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 3

fedest.com, questions and answers