Kathleen Riley knows her beliefs on the male-only priesthood and contraception put her at odds with leaders of her church. But as a fifth-generation Catholic who went to a Catholic school and grew up to teach in one, Riley feels the faith deeply woven through her. So when her Arlington parish asked for volunteers last summer to teach Sunday school, she felt called by the Holy Spirit to say yes.Read the rest here.
A year later, the 52-year-old computer scientist feels the same spirit calling her to say no.
Last month, Riley joined at least four other Sunday school teachers and resigned from her post at St. Ann’s parish after a letter arrived at her home requiring her — and all teachers in the Arlington Catholic Diocese — to submit “of will and intellect” to all of the teachings of church leaders.
Looks like the Romans are trying to root out the Episcopal wannabes from important positions. Good for them.
20 comments:
Hmmm...I wonder if this is, at least in part, a reaction against the weirdos running the Episcopal Church these days and their droppings.
No, it isn't.
Would you, oh convert John (Ad Orientem), submit your "will and intellect" to the dictates of a bishop?
This attempt, shades of the Inquisition, is not an attempt to prevent or root out Episcopal wannabes. It's an attempt to constrict, restrain and prevent any questioning or thinking.
It's an insult to intelligence.
"Would you, oh convert John (Ad Orientem), submit your "will and intellect" to the dictates of a bishop?"
This isn't submission to the "dictates" of a bishop but to doctrines espoused by the pope. Here is the oath; and it is quite common to require Catholic employees and volunteers to adhere to it:
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19880701_professio-fidei_en.html
The line in question is:
"I adhere with religious submission of will and intellect to the teachings which either the Roman Pontiff or the College of Bishops enunciate when they exercise their authentic Magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim these teachings by a definitive act."
Catholics ought to have no problem with this. Naturally, Orthodox would.
When I became Orthodox I agreed to submit to my lawful bishop. Obviously if a bishop is preaching heresy or doing something gravely sinful all bets are off. But otherwise, yes, submission to lawful authority and acceptance of the faith is part of being either Orthodox or Catholic.
The do it yourself thing is pure Protestantism. These people should be honest and acknowledge that they are not Catholic. That's what I did when I realized I could not agree to the doctrine's of the Roman Church.
Isn't it funny how the "spirit" always agrees with what she wants to do? (: Oh so convenient.
I believe this is the same Statement of Faith one has to make on conversion to Roman Catholicism. In Orthodoxy, do converts make a similar Statement of Faith, I mean, in addition to the Creed?
I would think that the profession of belief in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church would imply submission to one's Bishop (as long as he taught the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Faith.)
As I recall I was asked to recite the Creed (sans filioque) and I had to make a life confession. In some jurisdictions you may also be required to specifically abjure the errors of your previous confession. When you become Orthodox it is expected that you will take a priest, usually your parish priest, as your spiritual father and confessor. You are of course also expected to be in submission to your bishop and to believe all that is and has always been taught by the Holy Orthodox Catholic Church in terms of morals and doctrine.
On matters of church discipline, as with the Roman Church, there is some latitude to disagree, but one must still obey.
While I might, perhaps, have preferred a promise not to teach anything contrary to the Magisterium (with removal from salaried or volunteer positions if violated), rather than not to think anything contrary to it (an unenforceable oath anyway), I have no problem with the concept that one who teaches the doctrine of a given group be required to actually teach the group's doctrine and not their own opinions.
There is a place for speculation, debate, and dialogue; but Sunday School and parochial school catechesis are NOT that place. Those who send their children to such classes have a right to expect that the teachers honor the expectation that what is taught will be authentic, not speculative. In this, the rights of the parents and students most emphatically trump the academic rights of the teachers.
Here is a link to the rubrics for the making of a catechumen according to the Great Book of Needs.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/shann/needs.iv.v.html
@ Mtka Anna:
A very wise person once said "You know that you have made God in your own image when God hates all the things you hate, and loves all the things you love."
Thanks, John, for the link and the reply. I agree w/ Fr. Theodore re: teachers, they should publicly commit themselves to no teaching anything contrary to the RC faith/morals. I still think this additional pledge of "submission of the intellect and will" to what ever the Magisterium proclaims "even when they do not intend to proclaim these teachings by a definitive act" is too much for a lay convert.
"I adhere with religious submission of will and intellect to the teachings which either the Roman Pontiff or the College of Bishops enunciate when they exercise their authentic Magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim these teachings by a definitive act."
"Catholics ought to have no problem with this. Naturally, Orthodox would."
Actually and obviously, some Catholics, ( who may have a deeper understanding), also have a problem with this.
But have it your way.
Anon@11:11 a.m.
Teachers are not being hired to teach their personal or political views on doctrinal issues. Everybody's political and personal views can't be made official.
Liberals do not just disagree, they demand their views be made official.
How has the Anglican church treated those who have disagreed with them on women's ordination or homosexuality? They are not being nice anymore.
Savvy
I know this is an old cliche but didn't the Catholic church demand that Galileo "submit his will and intellect" to the teaching of Church authorities over a subject they knew very little about?
cheesy
Noting that "Riley" is an Irish name, I was once in a conversation with a Catholic gentleman of Irish descent. He was ennumerating all the ways that his bishop and the Catholic Church were wrong on a wide variety of topics. At his conclusion I pointed out to him that "his" faith took him well outside the bounds of Catholicism and placed him squarely inside Anglicanism.
If you wish to see fireworks in broad daylight, suggest to an Irishman that he would made a wonderful English Anglican!
Nikolaus
Chessy,
Geocentrism was not an article of faith. Copernicus was a Bishop, so it was a different issue, in that case.
And besides it's not relevant to whether or not Jesus is the true son of God or not or whether marriage is a covenant between Christ and this Church or whether the Eucharist is a true sacrifice.
It can't prove or disprove this.
Savvy
Geocentrism may not have been "an article of faith" but it certainly was part of the "teaching" of the Magisterium as they themselves understood it.
Otherwise why was Galileo forced to recant his arguing for heliocentrism?
This is an interesting link- I suppose that the author and those he lists are not within the "Catholic fold".
http://www.ctpost.com/opinion/article/Cataloguing-Catholic-heroes-of-religious-liberty-3673617.php#ixzz20QyKejFS
Anon@11:06 a.m.
Copernicus wanted his views presented as hypothesis, because it was not yet proven by the scientific establishment. Gallielo insisted that it should be made fact. Why did the church not attack Copernicus then?
It was more like Gallieo had temperament issues. He was placed under house arrest where the church funded his research.
He wrote about this in his letters to the Jesuit Robert Bellarmine.
Please tell me how this is relevant to the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ, which is what the theology of the priesthood is about.
Savvy
When the Episcopal church ordained women. It marked a shift in consciousness. Priestess is sign language for goddess. That church has since then embraced pansexuality, and pantheism. Jesus is no longer important.
Sex/Gender has a lot to do with religion and how one sees God.
Hiding behind political language does not change this.
Savvy
There also needs to be consistency at the elementary level. A kid could have a liberal catechist one day and a conservative the other, and be totally confused.
Savvy
Post a Comment