Blog
The Church is not a Democracy by Frank Shannon
|
|
Here in the United States, blessed as we are to live in a republican form of democracy, we've grown accustomed to bucking authority. In our "government of the people, by the people, for the people," to quote President Abraham Lincoln, we ourselves are the authority, constitutionally speaking at least. The liberties provided under the Constitution of these United States into which we have been born or naturalized, blessedly so, differ from the obligations accompanying baptism into and continued sacramental participation in the Roman Catholic Church.
The government and the status quo have had their share of dissenters on either end of the ideological spectrum, protesting everything from wars, such as Viet Nam and Iraq, to laws, whether properly crafted through constitutionally provided legislative processes or fabricated by courtloads of agenda-driven judicial activists like those who cooked up Roe v. Wade.
This decidedly American spirit of protest, however, has developed an increasing tendency to bleed over into some people's personal and individual approach to other forms of authority, including the relationship between some American Catholics with the Roman Catholic Church. All too often the mainstream media tends to consciously exacerbate the situation.
Just such an instance took place recently when MSNBC provided a "Live Vote" poll on its website. The poll asked, "Do you agree with the Vatican's decision to excommunicate female priests and the bishops who ordain them?" Rather than offer merely "Yes" and "No" choices for voters, the poll listed, "Yes, church law states that only a baptized male can be made a priest," and, "No, women priests could help the church deal with its clergy shortage."
The news organization's poll, run with the caveat that it wasn't a "scientific survey," came in the wake of a decree issued in late May by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that made clear that any ordination of women priests would be met with automatic excommunication of the women as well as any participating bishop. Excommunication, as described in the Catechism (1463), is "the most severe ecclesiastical penalty, which impedes the reception of the sacraments and the exercise of certain ecclesiastical acts," and is incurred by the commission of "[c]ertain particularly grave sins."
Despite the portrayal of the Church as some monolithic, male-dominated organization heavyhandedly hammering dissent into the ground, excommunication isn't imposed by the Church, it's imposed on one's self by one's self as a consequence of one's actions. Excommunication is a state entered into by those lacking the humility to subjugate themselves to the authority of the Church and its magisterium, often in favor of some social or political agenda held apparently closer to the offender's heart than their own Catholicism.
We've got twenty centuries worth of Roman Catholicism to which to refer, and the Church has been rather diligent at maintaining a written record, including her rules and regulations. Beside Holy Scripture, we have the Catechism and other inspired writings going back to those who sat at table with Jesus Christ Himself. The Catechism (1577) quotes the Codex Iuris Canonici (Code of Canon Law) that "[o]nly a baptized man validly receives sacred ordination," and goes on to explain that "[t]he Lord Jesus chose men to form the college of the twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose collaborators to succeed them in their ministry. The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college of the twelve an ever-present and ever-active reality until Christ's return. The Church recognizes herself to be bound by this choice made by the Lord himself. For this reason, the ordination of women is not possible."
The United States is replete with those claiming that they "have a right" to this or that or the other thing. The Constitution establishes what our "rights" are, what freedoms we enjoy. Too often, judicial activists and even our lawmakers are all too willing to extraconstitutionally fabricate into law "rights" that are unrecognizable as such in the light of natural law and policies tenuously based on nothing more than what can at best be described as junk science. Such was the origin of such societal afflictions as Roe v. Wade, evolution being taught in our schools, and global warming. Origin of the specious, to say the least. Gay "marriage" is the next item on the "have a right" list.
The "women priest" crowd falls somewhere on that list, in direct contradiction to Church teaching. "No one," the Catechism states (1578), "has a right to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders. Indeed no one claims this office for himself; he is called to it by God. Anyone who thinks he recognizes the signs of God's call to the ordained ministry must humbly submit his desire to the authority of the Church, who has the responsibility and right to call someone to receive orders. Like every grace this sacrament can be received only as an unmerited gift."
The government and the status quo have had their share of dissenters on either end of the ideological spectrum, protesting everything from wars, such as Viet Nam and Iraq, to laws, whether properly crafted through constitutionally provided legislative processes or fabricated by courtloads of agenda-driven judicial activists like those who cooked up Roe v. Wade.
This decidedly American spirit of protest, however, has developed an increasing tendency to bleed over into some people's personal and individual approach to other forms of authority, including the relationship between some American Catholics with the Roman Catholic Church. All too often the mainstream media tends to consciously exacerbate the situation.
Just such an instance took place recently when MSNBC provided a "Live Vote" poll on its website. The poll asked, "Do you agree with the Vatican's decision to excommunicate female priests and the bishops who ordain them?" Rather than offer merely "Yes" and "No" choices for voters, the poll listed, "Yes, church law states that only a baptized male can be made a priest," and, "No, women priests could help the church deal with its clergy shortage."
The news organization's poll, run with the caveat that it wasn't a "scientific survey," came in the wake of a decree issued in late May by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that made clear that any ordination of women priests would be met with automatic excommunication of the women as well as any participating bishop. Excommunication, as described in the Catechism (1463), is "the most severe ecclesiastical penalty, which impedes the reception of the sacraments and the exercise of certain ecclesiastical acts," and is incurred by the commission of "[c]ertain particularly grave sins."
Despite the portrayal of the Church as some monolithic, male-dominated organization heavyhandedly hammering dissent into the ground, excommunication isn't imposed by the Church, it's imposed on one's self by one's self as a consequence of one's actions. Excommunication is a state entered into by those lacking the humility to subjugate themselves to the authority of the Church and its magisterium, often in favor of some social or political agenda held apparently closer to the offender's heart than their own Catholicism.
We've got twenty centuries worth of Roman Catholicism to which to refer, and the Church has been rather diligent at maintaining a written record, including her rules and regulations. Beside Holy Scripture, we have the Catechism and other inspired writings going back to those who sat at table with Jesus Christ Himself. The Catechism (1577) quotes the Codex Iuris Canonici (Code of Canon Law) that "[o]nly a baptized man validly receives sacred ordination," and goes on to explain that "[t]he Lord Jesus chose men to form the college of the twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose collaborators to succeed them in their ministry. The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college of the twelve an ever-present and ever-active reality until Christ's return. The Church recognizes herself to be bound by this choice made by the Lord himself. For this reason, the ordination of women is not possible."
The United States is replete with those claiming that they "have a right" to this or that or the other thing. The Constitution establishes what our "rights" are, what freedoms we enjoy. Too often, judicial activists and even our lawmakers are all too willing to extraconstitutionally fabricate into law "rights" that are unrecognizable as such in the light of natural law and policies tenuously based on nothing more than what can at best be described as junk science. Such was the origin of such societal afflictions as Roe v. Wade, evolution being taught in our schools, and global warming. Origin of the specious, to say the least. Gay "marriage" is the next item on the "have a right" list.
The "women priest" crowd falls somewhere on that list, in direct contradiction to Church teaching. "No one," the Catechism states (1578), "has a right to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders. Indeed no one claims this office for himself; he is called to it by God. Anyone who thinks he recognizes the signs of God's call to the ordained ministry must humbly submit his desire to the authority of the Church, who has the responsibility and right to call someone to receive orders. Like every grace this sacrament can be received only as an unmerited gift."
Those pushing for the ordination of women, who characterize the Church as anachronistic, claim that Christ was only following the social norms of the times, but how often did Jesus breach those social norms? Had Jesus stuck to social norms, the "woman who had been caught in adultery" (John 8:3-11) would have been stoned to death rather than told by our Lord, "Neither do I condemn you." Had our Lord abided by social norms, Matthew would have remained at his customs post rather than sharing a table with Jesus and "tax collectors and sinners" to the consternation of the Pharisees (Matthew 9:9-13). Lepers would have remained uncleansed, the blind sightless, and the lame crippled.
Francis X. Shannon is a Tampa Tribune columnist, a third-degree Knight of Columbus, and Catholic writer. He can be contacted at (813)546-2282 or FXShannon@aol.com.
Francis X. Shannon is a Tampa Tribune columnist, a third-degree Knight of Columbus, and Catholic writer. He can be contacted at (813)546-2282 or FXShannon@aol.com.
Categories: None
Post a Comment
Oops!
The words you entered did not match the given text. Please try again.
Oops!
Oops, you forgot something.