Home
Earthquake in Canada
"Once upon a time, they might've been boiled in oil, drawn and quartered, hung by the neck and, if their luck held out, swiftly guillotined," a Canadian news outlet notes of the 19 Roman Catholic priests in the province of Quebec who defied the Vatican on gay "marriage" and ordaining homosexuals in an open letter published in Montreal's La Presse newspaper. Ah, but those were better days. (To those readers who are poised to comment in outrage: This is a joke. Or, on second thought, maybe not: One definitely wants more from her bishop than the statement that dissent on this scale and in this matter is "not an earthquake." It is.)
The National Catholic Reporter's Vatican correspondent John Allen had this to say in an article about the renegade priests:
"I am not sure what the scandal is," Allen, author of "The Rise of Benedict XVI" and a new book, "Opus Dei," told The Gazette.
"These 19 signatories are the usual suspects. There is no name on that list that would just shock you. There is nobody of any rank on that list that would surprise you that they would sign such a letter."
Having covered dissident Catholics for the National Catholic Register, I am sure they are the usual suspects. But that doesn't mean it doesn't matter. These priests will claim to speak for the Church--some true, non-hierchical Church that exists in their imaginations--and people will believe that, indeed, what they say is what the Church teaches.
Catholic blogger Diogenese sums up this problem:
"What about the naive Catholics who presume that, when they visit their local parish, the homily will faithfully reflect what the Church teaches, and what they need to hear as they work toward their own salvation?"
John Allen gets that point, too:
"But there is an expectation that if someone is teaching, preaching or publishing in the name of the Church, they should not add to the confusion of what Church teaching actually is.
There's one time-tested method of ensuring that parish preaching matches Catholic orthodoxy. It's called a bishop--that is, one who accepts his responsibility."
One of these paragons of priestly virtue appears to have had quite the career before he entered the priesthood--indeed, one might ask: What was his vocations director thinking? Not that there's anything wrong with this, as Seinfeld would say.
The National Catholic Reporter's Vatican correspondent John Allen had this to say in an article about the renegade priests:
"I am not sure what the scandal is," Allen, author of "The Rise of Benedict XVI" and a new book, "Opus Dei," told The Gazette.
"These 19 signatories are the usual suspects. There is no name on that list that would just shock you. There is nobody of any rank on that list that would surprise you that they would sign such a letter."
Having covered dissident Catholics for the National Catholic Register, I am sure they are the usual suspects. But that doesn't mean it doesn't matter. These priests will claim to speak for the Church--some true, non-hierchical Church that exists in their imaginations--and people will believe that, indeed, what they say is what the Church teaches.
Catholic blogger Diogenese sums up this problem:
"What about the naive Catholics who presume that, when they visit their local parish, the homily will faithfully reflect what the Church teaches, and what they need to hear as they work toward their own salvation?"
John Allen gets that point, too:
"But there is an expectation that if someone is teaching, preaching or publishing in the name of the Church, they should not add to the confusion of what Church teaching actually is.
There's one time-tested method of ensuring that parish preaching matches Catholic orthodoxy. It's called a bishop--that is, one who accepts his responsibility."
One of these paragons of priestly virtue appears to have had quite the career before he entered the priesthood--indeed, one might ask: What was his vocations director thinking? Not that there's anything wrong with this, as Seinfeld would say.
<< Loose Canon Home