The first line of the story on the website of CBS 2, a television station out of Chicago, is provocative:
There are tough questions for the Archdiocese of Chicago after it denied a lifelong Roman Catholic a church funeral.
But as Gertrude Stein famously remarked of Oakland, California, "There's no there there."
Here are the facts: Janine Denomme (described by CBS 2 as "a devoted parishioner at St. Gertrude's Roman Catholic Church on Chicago's North Side, attended by many members of the gay and lesbian community") was dying of cancer. An advocate of women's ordination, Denomme decided that she wanted to become a priest before she died, even though she fully understood that the Catholic Church teaches that women cannot be priests.
Warned by the Archdiocese of Chicago that attempting to receive ordination without meeting the requirements for doing so results in automatic excommunication under canon law, Denomme decided to proceed anyway. At that point, without any further action by the Archdiocese of Chicago, Denomme had separated herself from the Catholic Church.
A month later, Denomme died, and, in accordance with canon law, she was denied a Church funeral. Friends, and CBS 2 reporter Jay Levine, are up in arms, though Levine admits that Denomme's "longtime partner, Nancy Katz" has stated that "she knew that there was a risk involved with heeding her call for ordination."
The story is remarkable in many ways. Denomme and Katz seem to have been living an openly immoral life (Denomme once said of remarks by Chicago's Francis Cardinal George that "Using sexual orientation in the same line as moral failings does not make me feel welcome"), yet Church officials did not (contrary to the impression we're often given) reject Denomme for her sin.
But on women's ordination, Denomme knew what canon law required, and she violated it anyway. The question of a Church funeral was entirely in her hands, and she, not the Church, denied it to herself.
Still, CBS 2 reporter Jay Levine writes (in language that can hardly be considered objective journalism):
How does it hurt the church to say, she made a mistake, but she was our lifelong daughter, let her be buried in the church as she wanted?"We have to understand what the theology is," [Fr. Daniel] Smilanic [a canon lawyer for the Archdiocese of Chicago] said. "The Holy See has said that if people do this, they are automatically excommunicated. And the excommunication is reserved to the Holy See."
Translation: orders from Rome. Instant excommunication. Decreed by the same authority which takes years to excommunicate priests who abuse children.
There are parallels between Levine's "reporting" and much of the mainstream media's recent coverage of Catholic clerical sexual abuse. Both suffer, at best, from a lack of understanding of the structures and procedures of the Catholic Church, and, at worst, from an unwillingness to attempt to understand those structures, which often is rooted in anti-Catholicism, whether blatant or latent.
"How does it hurt the church to say, she made a mistake"? It would hurt the Church because to say that would be to say an untruth. Denomme, according to Katz, knew exactly what she was doing, and what the consequences would be. Taking such action while holding such knowledge is not a "mistake"; it is a sin.
What Levine is asking the Church to do in this case is precisely what caused the clerical sexual-abuse scandal. Far too many bishops treated the deliberate, sinful behavior of priests as a "mistake" made by a "lifelong son"—a mistake that the predator priest (unlike Denomme) always claimed to be sorry for.
But this is the anti-Catholic narrative today: The Catholic Church is wrong on women's ordination, wrong on celibacy, and wrong on homosexuality, but soft on abusive priests. Never mind that priests who adhered to their vows of celibacy never abused anyone, nor that the vast majority of cases of clerical sexual abuse involved, not children, but postpubescent males—a sure sign that the homosexual inclinations of the predator priests played a role.
Of course, it may be better that "reporters" such as Levine do not come to understand that the problem of clerical sexual abuse had its roots in homosexuality and the treating of sin as a "mistake." If they did, they might feel compelled to defend the abusers and the bishops who enabled them, at the very time when the Catholic Church is attempting to clean up this mess, once and for all.
I’ve been hearing this ever since I converted to Catholicism 9 years ago. But I’ve never, ever heard a priest mention that marriage would help the sex abuse problem. Of all the Catholic faithful that I’ve known, I’ve never heard anyone offer either married priests or the ordination of women as an answer either.
I do hear it from non-catholics; I had the honor of serving at the Splendor of the Vatican exhibit recently and I was asked about married priests from a non-catholic.
If married priests were the answer, then there would be no pedophilia or homosexuality going on with married people. That is obviously not the case.
I think both these questions are a dodge by people who have their own agenda and doesn’t relate to the real theological questions they purport to address.
The Catholic church honors womens’ roles in the church more than any other denomination I can think of.
We have female saints, who are often quoted and honored.
I know at least several young priests in my archdiocese, and one personally, who, if they were not seminarians or a priest would highly desirable bachelors, but I know they chose their vocation because this is what they believe God called them to do.
I think these two questions, married priests and womens’ ordination are issues that stem from lay people who have their own agendas.
I have always found it puzzling why the Catholic haters refuse to accept that those unfortunate priests who abused their charges were homosexuals and even if they had not become priests and married, they would soon have fallen back into doing that which they are inclined to. We have evidence here in our country where homosexuality is totally rejected, of men who marry, only to be discovered by their wives years later, that they are, in fact homosuals.
So let this falacy be exposed once and for all. We have sex abuse in the Church not because of Celibacy, but because homosexuals found their way into our Seminaries and became priests.
As for women ordination, the less said the better. Christ had 12 male Apostles. He had the women who were very loyal to Him but never made a single one an Apostle.
Finally, in every Religion in the world, where Sacrifices are offered to God the Creator, that role has never, ever been carried out by women. Priests offer the Sacrifice of the Mass to God the Father and, therefore, they have to be men. Women in the Catholic Church have played very vital and very responsible roles in the Church. When I joined the Catholic University of Eastern Africa in 1994, the Dean of the Faculty of Theology was a Nun, Sister Marie Theresa Gacambi!! If that is not the apex of a very high Office in the Catholic Church held by a woman, then I need to be told what else women would want to be given to feel appreciated and honoured by Mother Church.
There are many catholics who are deeply concerned about the sexual and physical abuse committed by priests. They are not all feminists or gay or liberal.The church in the United States has done an exemplary job of changing the policy of handling pedophiles priests. My diocese of Pittsburgh has mandatory classes where anyone who is in contact with children through their ministry or volunteer activity must attend and be educated on the process of how and when to report any abuse activity. I am sure this is true everywhere.Quite honestly to pretend that men who have given up their heterosexual nature to become a catholic priest and be celibate will not attract a greater percentage of deviate behaviors is not realistic. To be single is a choice, not everyone needs to be married to be fulfilled. But to deny male human behavior of sexual response is unnatural. It is contrary to what God our creator intended. This is the reason why married Catholics are taught to procreate and to enjoy their sexuality within the sanctity of marriage. We are told that is what God intended. so why are priests made to give up this choice. Anglicans may soon be joining our Roman Catholic faith. They are married. Do married people commit sexual abuse against children? Yes, but what percentage of them compared to the percentage of priests are guilty fo these heinous acts? I would be interested in seeing this data if it exists.will allowing priests to marry stop pedophile behavior? No, but it may attract more men who have normal heterosexual behaviors and that alone should decrease the abuse.
Why was Cardinal Law given such a lofty position of power in the Vatican?
Denomme had separated herself from the Catholic Church.
So let me get this straight….she separates herself from the Catholic Church but wants to be buried by the church?
That makes no sense to me.
Did she feel that her ‘ordination’, and I use the term loosely as it sounds bogus like those ‘life’ degrees you buy online,
would guarantee burial in the church and a ticket to Heaven.
Nobody could be that stupid, but I guess if you are a liberal who does not mind trouncing all over a sacred calling like clergy, why not?
What I cannot figure out is why you chose to dignify such a sham on this site. It gives dignity to someone who clearly had none while she was alive.
To Diane Bialecki,
There are already rites within the Catholic Church in which married men can be ordained as priests – just not in the Roman Rite. The Anglican Ordinariate will probably be something along those lines. It should be noted also that men who become priests in those other rites cannot then marry after they have been ordained.
The church does not force priests to be celibate – that is the choice that those men make when they are ordained. And the church does call all Christians (laypeople as well as priests) to be chaste. For married people that means being faithful to their spouse. For unmarried people that means being celibate regardless of whether or not you are a priest.
Hey, Steve, Welcome to the Roman Catholic Church. God bless you! And, yes, I totally agree with all you say here, Steve. There’s a lot of anti-Catholic bigotry, especially in the U.S. They don’t care about protecting kids. They’re just having a field day, trying to take down the Roman Catholic Church.
I must correct you on one point, though: Holy Mother Church — The Catholic Church — is not a denomination. She is the One True Church.
You don’t hear that phrase much anymore because it’s not politically correct, but we old-timers always know it. The proper language can clarify many foggy issues.
Diana, what does this mean: “Quite honestly to pretend that men who have given up their heterosexual nature to become a catholic priest and be celibate will not attract a greater percentage of deviate behaviors is not realistic.” ?
Pls I need some to clearify me on what is happening in the Church this days. I saw a woman ordined last week in Italy and i have heard so many in US. I want to know if it has become right, for woman to become a Priest?
Eugene Johnpaul, No, women cannot become priests for very valid reasons. God made us equal, though we are complementary as opposed to interchangeable. We each have specific roles that are equal in what we as individuals offer God. What you saw and read about women priests is a “mockery.” As they attempt ordination of women, they sever their communion with the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, immediately. They ex-communicate themselves. It is sad, Pride is a horrific sin, it leads to death of the soul. Pray for them!
A women just died in Milwaukee who claimed to be a priest. They gave it a similar story and included the fact that a group of other women priests were involved in her funeral. The main paper in this town can never let up on it’s attacks on the Church.
Pope Benedict is a woman.
She is better off. As a former Catholic I would not be caught dead in a Catholic Church.
While unfortunate, Gertrude Stein knew what her actions will do. I hope the Lord forgives her action, but she violated the law, and must follow the consequences.
On a side note, I will pray for you Ted W. Your soul clearly needs help, so filled with hatred.
It was announced today in the Detroit News and Free Press that she is to be given a “memorial Mass” at Nativity Church, Detroit, this Saturday at 10 AM.
I have sent an email to Bp. Vigneron requesting that he put a stop to it, as well as a very strongly-worded email to the Pastor of the parish expressing my outrage. It’s worthy of note that he is himself a very liberal, most probably dissident, priest.
Perhaps she should’ve done some research, and discovered that there are OTHER Catholic Churches besides the Roman one. Old Catholics in Holland, Switzerland and Germany broke off from Rome around 1870 over the doctrine of papal infallibility. They have a clear line of Apostolic Succession, and even the Roman Catholic Church acknowledges that their sacraments are valid. ( Dominus Iesus issued by the Roman Catholic Magisterium in the year 2000, signed by John Paul II on June 16, and Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger on August 6, states:
“The churches which, while not existing in perfect communion with the (Roman) Catholic Church, remain united to her by means of the closest bonds, that is, by Apostolic Succession and a valid Eucharist, are true particular churches.” Female clergy exists in these branches, and there are no hang-ups regarding married priests and openly GLBT priests/clergy. One such church is the Apostolic Catholic Church of Antioch ( churchofantioch.org )
It makes me sad that this dear sister in Christ butted her head against such a stubborn wall. She could’ve remained Catholic and received a Requiem Mass and the Rite of Christian Burial. Rome does NOT have a “cornered market” on authority: there are other Orthodox churches with older Apostolic Succession than the Roman one (e.g. Church of Antioch, Syria, etc. ) The Pope has been, until recent times, “the Bishop of Rome – the first among equals” in episcopal rank…
To Dan F.
Hear, hear!! I couldn’t have said it better. It has nothing to do with gender preference. It is having sex outside of marriage. There are clergymen who have abused women and girls as well. And to assume that only homosexuals are guilty of sexual abuse tells every person who has ever been raped by someone of the opposite sex that the rape wasn’t abuse. Sex belongs in marriage. Period. Some of us choose to be single. Some of us who make that choice also choose to become priests or nuns. MOST of them (and the lay people for that matter) are not abusers. That just doesn’t seem to make good news copy.
Check the bible “One can not serve two masters”
from cire
We have the Dogma of the Trinity. God sent His only Begotten Son(male gender). A priest as a male reflects this male gender or it is not represented at all. There is nothing in between.
Those (mostly from the feminist movement) would like the Church to change the Dogma of the Trinity to a Dogma of the Foursome. There is no better strategy to undermine Christianity completely.
The Tradition Established by Christ Himself
Yet even if we disregard the differences between the sexes, as many advocates of women’s ordination do, we have to face the fact that the ordination of men is an unbroken tradition that goes back not only to the Apostles but to Christ Himself. As the Catechism of the Catholic Church (para. 1577) states:
“Only a baptized man (vir) validly receives sacred ordination.” The Lord Jesus chose men (viri) 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.
As long as the Vatican clings to patriarchal ideals and keeps up its dogmatic, political agenda it WILL cause the entire Catholic Church as we know it to fall from it. In my personal opinion Catholicism at its purest has long been out of the hands of the Vatican, it is in the hands of the followers of the truth, the average Catholic man and woman on the street. Almost everything the Catholic Hierarchy says are contrary to what Jesus actually taught. If Jesus walked into the Vatican today he would most surely treat it in the exact same way as He did the money changers in the temple. The child abuse scandals are another story altogether, there are pedophiles in all walks of life and the Catholic Church is a target or stands out because it is so large, the largest organised body in the world actually so logically if a scandal occurs in the Church it will stand out like a sore thumb simply due to its massive media coverages and size. The reality is that the Vatican and Church Hierarchy have fallen out of touch with the realities of the world and the teachings of Jesus. I say to all Catholics, do not break away from the Mother Church, there will be an inevitable break away from the Vatican. After all, is it not the Eucharist and the compassionate teachings of Jesus Christ and the carrying forth thereof that matters more than the political and dogmatic insanity we are facing today? “Do this in memory of me”…
What a lot of nonsense. Within the past year we have learned that a Jesuit priest who lost his job as the head of a Jesuit high school 15 years ago for molesting students, with full knowledge of the Jesuit order, had been saying mass unsupervised at our parish church for the past five years. Spare me the rationalizations about “postpubescent” victims and “homosexuality” being the real problem. Even if it were true that all or most of the victims were older teenagers (read the report on abuse in Ireland and you will see it is not), there’s nothing normal about this kind of predatory behavior. It is a complete betrayal not only of religious vows but of trust between people who are supposed to be teachers and their students who depend on them for guidance and wisdom. If teachers at the local public high school were caught doing this, they’d be in jail. I wouldn’t send my children to a school that would act otherwise. Yet I’m supposed to accept this from the church. And that’s the point. The church has made a policy of shielding predators for decades. We know that for a fact. It could well be centuries. Despite all the investigations and sincere attempts to clean it up, new scandals continue to erupt. We also know that as a fact. As a parent, I do not see how I can responsibly expose my children to an organization that has so consistently concealed these predators. Your lame defense of these grotesque systematic lapses make your objections to female priests look like exactly what they are — legalistic arguments that have no relationship whatsoever with true morality. And you can’t lay this off on “Catholic haters” who haven’t don’t have the interest in understanding the church’s “reasoning” on this. I understand it quite well. It is totally flawed. Not surprising given the manifest bigotry and corruption of the system that produced it.
Mr. Larkin, I’m not quite sure what article you read, but I fail to see how you can get turn this (my words):
into this (your words):
Beyond that, some of what you write is simply untrue. For instance, it is manifestly not the case that “If teachers at the local public high school were caught doing this, they’d be in jail.” Several nationwide studies have shown that child sexual abuse is a) more prevalent in public schools than it was at the height of the scandal in the Catholic Church, and b) covered up more completely than bishops at their worst ever did.
Or this: “Despite all the investigations and sincere attempts to clean it up, new scandals continue to erupt.” No, for the most part, OLD scandals continue to erupt. In 2009 (the last year for which complete statistics have been released by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice), a total of six—yes, six—allegations were made against Catholic priests in the United States. All other allegations made in that year concerned events that were decades old.
You write that the Church’s reasoning behind not ordaining women is “totally flawed,” but you don’t explain how. If you’re going to argue against the Church’s teaching on this matter, it’s going to take more than deflecting the argument into a discussion of the clerical sexual-abuse scandal.