Fairfax church dispute pits free speech, church doctrine

There was an instance in my own diocese where something similar happened. A woman director of religious education at a parish expressed beliefs of this kind and refused to renounce beliefs counter to the Church, which she'd expressed in an academic context. The Bishop required that she be fired from her position, since she was not faithfully representing the Catholic Church but obstinately opposing it. Some people were upset, some people said they wouldn't come to church anymore, etc. When these things happen, it tends to winnow out the people who are more devoted to the idea of women's ordination (or whatever else) than to the Eucharist and the Church. The Church has really been clear about it, especially Pope John Paul II in his 1994 Apostolic Letter "Ordinatio Sacerdotalis," on "The Reservation of Priestly Ordination to Men Alone," referred to in the Post's article only briefly and not by name, and immediately dismissed by reference to the belief of the dissenters that it's bad theology. The letter concludes: "Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church's divine constitution itself, in virtue of Our ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) We declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful." This could hardly be more clear. It's not an open question. To privately feel uncertainty about it is not a sin, but to agitate against it is a form of agitating against the Catholic faith.

The way a situation like this is regarded and handled in a Catholic parish is different than, say, if it was Baptists. The way to reconciliation with the Church is also different--sacramental confession being the essential part of it. Through absolution, the Blood of Christ is applied to take away the sin and the person is reunited with the Church.

What Sylvia Mulherin said was not radical. She was just stating the obvious. Many, many people employed by the Roman Catholic Church have said more radical things -- including many bishops! Fr. Whitestone should not have forced her to resign. Indeed, if anything, he has a personal moral obligation to extend forgiveness to this sister (although, again, in my opinion she said nothing that is not true). He ought to apologize and welcome her back.

If one chooses to associate with a group of people who hold to silly, superstitious beliefs, one should expect this sort of treatment if one criticizes those silly, superstitious beliefs.

The answer is to not associate with people who hold to silly, superstitious beliefs that you do not agree with.

I think you ought to be applauded, Michelle, for the callousness with which you have disregarded Mrs. Mulherin's request that you stop bringing this issue up. This is twice now you've tried to milk a difficult decision for her for, what? A few more hits on your blog? At this point, this is a he-said she-said situation, and all you've done is print hearsay and made some insinuations. I hope that should you ever become the editor of the religion section in some paper, or whatever happens to be the career goal for which you work, that this particularly cynical bit of exploitation was worth it.

I'm a member of the parish and have far more faith in Father Whitestone honesty than the Washington Post's. You can count on the Washington Post to stir up controversy where none exists--especially if it can fan flames of anti-Catholicism. Fr. Whitestone is simply one of the most merciful priests in the diocese. I have serious doubts the circumstances are as the Post reported them---but that's not unusual--is it?

As a former newspaper reporter and a retired pastor I think it is unfair to condemn the Post for covering this issue. This is not some sideshow concern but a major problem for institutions and people of religious faith. Often these issues revolve around homosexuality. There are no easy and probably no right or wrong answers when a faith community struggles to decide what its boundaries will be. But these are important issues that we people of faith should think about. They deeply are important to our religious lives.

Monty Keeling

Unless you're a legal eagle
or a member of the perverted,
child molesting catholic
"church" the question to be
answered is:

Who in god-damned hell cares
what happens behind the walls
of this filthy dark age anachronism?

While agreeing with the initial publishing of the article Michelle, it does appear that you have overextended yourself and thoughts with continuation. That said what occured with the Church - the Priest and the Organist/member will only be resolved once women are ordained within the Catholic Church for as with the US constitution regarding the right to verbalize that all Americans has having equal rights - aside from women and Black slaves, but not to abide by this writing - the Good Ole Boys Network ruled over such matters until the 20th century when these two groups of Americnas finally got their rights. I, as a Catholic, do believe that much of the New Testament was written and conceived by men with one agenda which was to ensure that their [male] religious agenda would be held constant over the years and thus they as men would remain in power. I all to well remember the days when girls and women were essentially not allowed on the altar area and thankfully this has changed. I do believe that in time and necessity that women will eventually need to be ordained as Priests. Of course some churches will accept this and others not - as with many other Christian dominations. Nevertheless, the issue needs to be kept alive as the columnist has but not beaten to death.

The word religion comes from the Latin root meaning "to connect". It has nothing to do with any buildings or people who wear funny clothes and think they have any more power than another.

Unless you're a legal eagle
or a member of the perverted,
child molesting catholic
"church" the question to be
answered is:

Who in god-damned hell cares
what happens behind the walls
of this filthy dark age anachronism?

you read this stuff about the church "not being a democracy" and the obgligation to "protect the faith" - and then wonder about how these people can claim that the church can or should have any say in how this country is being run. It's patently rediculous for people to claim that this is a "Christian nation" founded on "biblical principles" when you see in real life how antithical the church practice is to our civic and political norms. If these people feel the need to hold these values within their own organization, that is their right - but don't then turn around and tell the rest of us that that organization should have any say in how the rest of us run our lives as Americans.

The essence of any organized religion is control, domination, suppression. Millions have died as a result. Millions more have been attacked, vilified, ostracized. I was brought up Catholic, went to Catholic schools, etc. I signed goodbye to all that quite a while ago, because I saw what a soul-killing machine it was. Here is just another, petty example of theocratic humbug.

A lot of "the faithful" seem to confuse real faith and the Roman Catholic Church. Though the RC Church isn't a democracy, there should be room for expression of different opinions. When I look at many of the Church hierarchy and other marketers, I can't help asking myself why I or anyone would want to spend eternity with them!

It's things like this that make me glad the day I turned 18 I decided not to be Catholic anymore. They are defending a decision some man made ages ago not a Biblical one. Women used to be ordained before a man decided that shouldn't be allowed anymore. I'm sure I'm not the only woman who has a problem with that. There are probably a few men, too.

I wish Mrs. Mulherin the best.

If you choose to be Roman Catholic, you follow the tenets of the Church. Picking and choosing in a buffet-style Catholicism is your personal choice, but if you choose (free will) not to follow the Church, what gives you the right to vilify those who do?Make your own choice. There was a time when I wanted to become a priest, but I realized that I wanted to marry and raise a family. I made my choice, and I cannot be a priest. But I am still a Roman Catholic.

JuniusPublicus wrote:
"The essence of any organized religion is control, domination, suppression." Such a blanket statement reveals a unmistakably myopic view of the church. While various organized religions have perpetrated terrible abuses over the ages, the essence of Christianity has nothing to do with the control of which JuniusPublicus speaks. The human proclivity to make mistakes, which we must always strive to avoid or correct, does not override the tremendous good historically done by followers of Christ. Besides, does Junius think that people who throw faith out of the window do any better? As a lifelong Lutheran Christian I feel part of a church that has been and is striving to follow Christ's way of self-giving love. To be sure, mistakes are made . . . but that's what forgiveness is for.

The Catholic Church, including the Arlington Diocese of which St. Leo's parish is a part, has taken a very unwelcome hard-right turn since Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, began to dictate its liturgical (and political) policies during the decline of John Paul XVI. It is difficult to see how these crackdowns on "failures to defend the faith" serve the best interests of the church or the people it serves.

The Catholic Church's mistreatment of women is not part of scripture nor is it a permanent aspect even of the Roman church. It was something that developed as the Middle Ages were drawing to a close, and in some cases, such as the dictate that priests remain celibate, even later than that. It was a political, not a spiritual, shift, and its relation to "faith" is rather specious, in my view.

The church would do itself great credit if it would continue the shifts begun by Pope John XXIII rather than attempt to revert to its glory days in the Dark Ages.

As a Unitarian Universalist, I am blessed with freedom of speech and “a free and responsible search for truth and meaning.” I highly recommend this faith community.

"When these things happen, it tends to winnow out the people who are more devoted to the idea of women's ordination (or whatever else) than to the Eucharist and the Church."

Or, it's a desperate act of circling the wagons, which has the contrary effect of "purifying" the doctrine to the point of irrelevance to the real problems that exist in society.

Reasoned disagreement refines one's thinking. The Church benefits by *engaging* in these difficult issues, not by burying them under the veneer of conformity.

I was raised Catholic, though I eventually could not continue in good conscience because I find much of the authoritarian structure and the doctrine it produces to be in stark opposition to Christ's message. The Catholic Church, however, has an intellectual tradition that keeps it somewhere above the level of the barely-literate, corrupt, fascist pseudo-religious "right" in the US. I dread developments that would dull Catholic thinking by enforcing blind obedience.

I don't want to take sides in this controversy. Is that an option?

How many RCs are baptized by their own choice and free will? How many RCs know the teachings of the RCC and fully ( 100% ) agree with them? How many RCs know the history of the RCC? Have you ever been able to ask a priest questions and get ancers? Do American RCs meet RCC standards other than by econmics? Think and ask questions.

Confucius says:
"Those who lie with fleas usually get bitten".

"The church has the right and the duty to ensure that our young ones are in the care of someone who defends the faith."

A true faith needs no defense - its truth will be self-evident.

From an American citizen's perspective, the Catholic Church is a club. We may belong or not. Please understand that the Catholic Church is not a democracy, and under its rules, dissent is not permitted. I feel badly for Ms. Mulherin, but her choice is clear -- obey the rules or leave the club. This is the same decision that Martin Luther faced in 1517.

I know neither Fr. Whitestone, nor Ms. Mulherin, but have from time to time been to St. Leo's. I find the unattributed quote in the second to the last paragraph extremely troubling. To make such an accusation in the absence of identifying the speaker is tantatmount to character assassination. Bad so-called journalism.

Just step back and look at how ridiculous the whole thing is. All these people getting all worked up about something that can't even be proven. Are you seriously saying that the Catholic faith has a monopoly on what people should think. What about the Jewish faith? Buddhist? Hindu? Zoroastrian? Come on, give me a break. It's a huge sham people, and to get all worked up over it is a waste of time. I'm going to live my life during this lifetime and not worry about Dante's version of purgatory and hell which should have died a long time ago. The Church wants your money, people, and influence over you, so wake up!

She knows the answer: the Church is a club with by-laws, and if you can't abide by them, you have to leave. This is a problem peculiar to Catholics with its hierarchical authority. Among the Protestant churches, especially the evangelical and other fundamentalist sects, as a particular sect diverges from an ecclesiastical episcopacy and tends toward congregational governance, the more likely it is that disgruntled members will leave the particular church or congregation they are in conflict with to find another that appeals to them. If the Pope and curia don’t agree with the ideas of a member, the member has to either conform or, if they protest, they have to leave, i.e., join the Protestant ranks. Doctrine and its practice are centrally decided and controlled in the Catholic Church; congregants have little to no input, including such minor concerns as maintenance of the church building. Protestants can leave one church for another as most do not see the authority of Christianity as residing solely in the church, but in scripture, and they generally subscribe to the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers. Also most Protestants do not accept the doctrine of apostolic succession, a belief which further supports the notion that the Church is the sole authority on doctrine. Absent these three bulwarks of the Catholic Church’s claim to being the sole authority, leaving one Protestant sect or congregation for another does not result in a crisis of faith as it does for a protesting Catholic. Regardless of the anguish this causes, it is a question of one’s personal faith and not for redress by the community. If you can’t live within the Church, leave, there are many Christian congregations that will welcome you.

If the crux of the argument is ordination of women, of course there's no discussion. Even the Pope himself couldn't ordinate women if he wanted to. Sacraments are set in stone, as instituted by Christ; they aren't the same thing as Canon Law, which can be changed.

Bah, bah little sheep. If you choose to blindly follow the tenets of any organized religion then you have chosen your path. Follow it, or open up your eyes, realize that all religions are bunk, and chart your own way through life.

For those who might be curious to listen to what the Catholic Church says about the reservation of priestly ordination to men alone, this is the key document, "Ordinatio Sacerdotalis," 1994, Pope John Paul II:
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_22051994_ordinatio-sacerdotalis_en.html

Also of interest is a 1995 follow-up question about whether the teaching in the above letter, written by Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) and explicitly approved by Pope John Paul II, is to be regarded as infallible:
http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFRESPO.HTM

I'm a Catholic woman who agrees with the Church's teaching about this. ALL members of the Body of Christ participate in the priestly, prophetic, and kingly mission of Jesus. However, Jesus chose male Apostles only and the Church follows his practice. The sign value of male ministers acting in the person of Jesus celebrating the Mass reflects the espousal of Christ to the Church, the espousal of God and humanity. Men and women equally share in human dignity, however as a woman I affirm that men and women aren't simply interchangeable!

This unfortunate incident, though hardly unique, is a symptom of the fear of losing control that infests many paternalistic institutions. The idea that members of the Church are sheep, forbidden to challenge the deeply misogynistic and autocratic rulings of its male dominated hierarchy has been a fatal characteristic of the Church for centuries - and perhaps a good explanation for its declining membership throughout the Western world.

If an institution cannot be responsive to the contemporary cultural and social needs of its members, they're going to seek spiritual and social guidance elsewhere. Many American Catholics have already voted on the Church's insanely antiquated views of women's rights with their feet. Incidents like this will only give more reasons to do so.

As for the Church, it will only begin to have credibility on issues of marriage, family and the role of women in society when it has a Pope (or even members of the College of Cardinals) who can claim the honorable term of Mother in both its figurative and literal forms. Until then, it deserves to be ignored.

While Ms. Mulherin may be uncomfortable with the public attention that this tragic incident has received, she should feel no guilt or shame. She didn't leave the Church - it abandoned her.

Its not about free speech. Anyone who thinks women should be ordained and doesn't work for the catholic church can say so. No one will stop them - I certainly won't.

What I don't like is the idea of approaching a 70 year woman who may have poor health and then getting off on the fact she lost her job.

Michelle have you no shame? I guess not.

Some of you are confused about the decision process in the catholic church.

No matter how conservative or liberal a diocese is an employee of the catholic church may not speak out against that institution's teaching and remain employed at that institution.

If you worked at a company you would be treated in a similar way.

The Pope closed the topic for discussion four years ago.

Any employee of the church knows that their private conscience is their own and to talk privately with others in disagreement with the church is not a serious problem but to speak out publicly is a different story.

What's in the family stays in the family.

By the way this is the Post's third article on the topic.

They seem to be causing the choir director a lot of pain.

Are they sadistic or what?

Catholic bashing is one of the last discriminatory actions that is still tolerated in this ultra-PC 21st century US.

I'm sure that in a county with countless places of worship, and over a million people, that "church people" have disagreements over policies and people leave or are fired all the time.

Why is this news? Because it happened as a result of a news story, and it happened in a Catholic Church. A reporter's dream - Catholic bashing AND a story all about her and the result of her story.

It isn't news, it isn't anyone's business, and it shouldn't be an excuse for all of the anti-Catholic rhetoric posted here.

elizdelphi

You wrote, "To privately feel uncertainty about it is not a sin, but to agitate against it is a form of agitating against the Catholic faith."

If you remember, it was the "religious officials" that took the most offense concerning Jesus.

Is it "agitating against the Catholic faith" or the Catholic religion?

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Dear Thomas, since Jesus conferred the priesthood on men only, and the Church must continue his mission on earth in fidelity to his teaching and example, it certainly seems to me to be those who want women to be ordained, who are taking offense at Jesus. The reason for the stability of the Church's position about this is based also on the stable and clear Tradition of the Church, and which has a magisterial authority which even the Pope himself is not at liberty to alter on a serious doctrinal matter like this.

Jesus treated women in a way that is an exemplar for every man. He treated women with great welcome, kindness, respect and love. In our day, a lot of people feel like the Catholic Church doesn't respect women, one reason is perhaps that in the general society together with good increases in opportunity and respect for women, there has also been a blurring of genders which the Church does not reflect, continuing to emphasize the complementarity of the sexes as something basic to human nature and God's plan. Actually the Church, although in some of its practice it still has some growing to do and that is recognized, has never taken more care to reflect and uphold the dignity of woman, for instance see Pope John Paul II's Apostolic Letter "Mulieris Dignitatem" on that subject:
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_15081988_mulieris-dignitatem_en.html
And the same Pope's 1995 "Letter to Women":
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_let_29061995_women_en.html
In this quite moving and heartfelt letter he says, for instance: "Thank you, every woman, for the simple fact of being a woman! Through the insight which is so much a part of your womanhood you enrich the world's understanding and help to make human relations more honest and authentic."

Also I wish to note that I edited poorly my post which gave the links to the relevent Vatican documents. The paragraph about the second link reads confusingly as if Cardinal Ratzinger was the author of "Ordinatio Sacerdotalis" but that was by John Paul II.

Father, what would the Christ you purport to follow do? Fire the the music director? I think not!! Try LIVING your faith, and not just speaking of it!!!

"Catholic bashing is one of the last discriminatory actions that is still tolerated in this ultra-PC 21st century US."

They done brainwashed you really well!

In reading Pope John Paul II's beautiful "Letter to Women" I found a passage that speaks very well to this situation:

"If Christ-by his free and sovereign choice, clearly attested to by the Gospel and by the Church's constant Tradition-entrusted only to men the task of being an "icon" of his countenance as "shepherd" and "bridegroom" of the Church through the exercise of the ministerial priesthood, this in no way detracts from the role of women, or for that matter from the role of the other members of the Church who are not ordained to the sacred ministry, since all share equally in the dignity proper to the "common priesthood" based on Baptism. These role distinctions should not be viewed in accordance with the criteria of functionality typical in human societies. Rather they must be understood according to the particular criteria of the sacramental economy, i.e. the economy of "signs" which God freely chooses in order to become present in the midst of humanity."
from: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_let_29061995_women_en.html

"If one chooses to associate with a group of people who hold to silly, superstitious beliefs, one should expect this sort of treatment if one criticizes those silly, superstitious beliefs.

The answer is to not associate with people who hold to silly, superstitious beliefs that you do not agree with.

Posted by: PSolus | January 28, 2010 5:58 PM "

Truer words were never spoken.

A Catholic priest lying?
The earth is flat, and priests don't molest little boys....

I'm struck by the comments of BosSox59 deriding those upset over the alleged actions of Fr.Whitestone as practicing "buffet-style Catholicism." This code is used by conservative Catholics to attack those raising questions about Church teachings on abortion or the ordination of women. The same scorn is rarely directed at those who disregard church teachings on the death penalty, social justice, or the inherent flaws of capitalism. While some argue that the former issues are more central to Church doctrine and the message of the Church, the fact is that the red letter words in the Bible are replete with discussions of the duty to the poor and the evil of wealth, while abortion and hierarchy are not found among the words of Christ in any version of the Bible.

fishgrow wrote: ... Sacraments are set in stone, as instituted by Christ"
WHAT A CROCK! Religion has nothing to do with the Christ or Jesus. but is man's inhumanity to man all too often.

Any "Catholic" who leaves The Catholic Church because of the human failings of its leaders is not a truly-believing Catholic. All human beings are imperfect and will sin at some point. We truly-believing Catholics know this and put all our faith in God and His Only Son, Jesus Christ. Humility is a virtue unsung but sorely-needed in American culture.

if the former nun had been a pedophile the church would merely have reassigned her to another unsuspecting parish.

How ironic! The very people who are defending the tyranny of the Catholic Hierarchy are freely expressing themselves in this open forum. You are exercising rights you deny to Ms. Mulherin and all those who seek to better the Church through thoughtful dialogue.

The new year approaching, click in. Let's facelift bar!
===== HTTP://itemtolive.com ====

Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33

UGG BOOT $50

Nike shox(R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3) $35

Handbags(Coach lv fendi d&g) $35

Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $16

Jean(True Religion,ed hardy,coogi) $30

Sunglasses(Oakey,coach,gucci,Armaini) $16

New era cap $15

Bikini (Ed hardy,polo) $25

FREE sHIPPING
====== HTTP://itemtolive.com =====

elizdelphi

You wrote, "Dear Thomas, since Jesus conferred the priesthood on men only, and the Church must continue his mission on earth in fidelity to his teaching and example,"

Seems as if Jesus conferred "Apostleship", if this is what you are referring to, and this means "one sent".

Jesus "sent" Mary Magdalene to the "Apostles", did He not? Does not the Catholic Church refer to Mary Magdelene as the "Apostle to the Apostles"?

Were not all of these "original" Apostles also all Jews?

How could we possibly drop one of the "so-called" requirements that Jesus supposedly put in place and yet use this "so-called" requirement in another way?

Is it not written, "There is neither male nor female, Jew nor Greek,..." as in meaning what I was taught in second grade, "We are all equal in God's Eyes"?

You then wrote, " it certainly seems to me to be those who want women to be ordained, who are taking offense at Jesus."

Jesus did not "belittle" anyone for being (male, female, Jew, Greek,...) but Jesus did have some rather harsh words for the "religious officials" that put themselfs up as an obstacle between anyone and God.

Considering the FACT that God is not a Male, a Female or an It, even tho God-Incarnate was a Male, it seems to me it is us humans that make up some of these "rules" whereas Jesus never specifically said anything about the "gender" of who is to be sent.

By the way, God Is a Being of Pure Love and Is One and yet is a Trinity.

I have met God the Father and the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit revealed to me that the Catholic Eucharist Is Jesus.

I cherish my Catholic Faith but sometimes the Catholic religion can get so caught up in "rules and regulations" that the simple yet profound message from Jesus "Proclaim the Good News" seems to take a back seat at times.

If the Good News is not Good News for all, than it is not Good News at all.

At Jesus's birth, the Angels made two statements both true and prophetic in nature: This is GOOD NEWS for All people and Peace to whom God's Favor rests.

God's Plan which is unfolding before our very eyes is ULTIMATELY for ALL to be in God's Kingdom, the new heavens and the new earth.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

To answer the question posed by "blasmaic" on the 29th: yes.

As to the discussion being closed, it is less a restriction on the discussion, than that a teaching of the Church has been settled definitively. There is no harm in finding out why, especially before you challenge it.

I'm glad if I can help:

http://manwithblackhat.blogspot.com/2009/09/peter-kreeft-explains-it-all-for-you.html

http://manwithblackhat.blogspot.com/2009/09/kreeft-revisited-plumbing-theology-101.html

God does alot of damage. Jews and Catholics catch most of it because they have been in the great Sky Fairy Fraud business longer than most. It would be really good to retire God to the trash heap of history and divert the money spent on the institutions of falsehood to real good works.