Milwaukee priest says women’s ordination would make ‘better sense’
Catholic World News - December 13, 2010
Sixteen years after Venerable John Paul II declared 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,” a priest of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee has written a newspaper column stating that the ordination of women would make “better sense” because women are more fitting images of the Church as the Bride of Christ.
After inaccurately stating that “celibacy for clergy began in monasticism” and was instituted for diocesan clergy only in the Middle Ages, Father Victor Capriolo added:
To study the Church is to realize that the one constant in her history has been change — from a married clergy to a celibate clergy, from Inquisition to ecumenism, from the way confession (Reconciliation) has been administered and the Mass celebrated, to the way the Church’s disciplines on fasting and abstinence and its moral stance on things such as usury and slavery have changed through time. Will there ever be women priests in the Catholic Church? I wonder.
In 1992, Archbishop Rembert Weakland named Father Capriolo the spiritual director of the archdiocese’s college seminarians; he is now a pastor in Fond du Lac, Wisconsin.
An appeal from our founder, Dr. Jeffrey Mirus:
Progress toward our January expenses ($19,744 to go):
Posted by: DCpa -
Dec. 14, 2010 10:43 AM ET USA
This is a conscious, premeditated test for the new Archbishop of Milwaukee. Let us all pray assiduously that he pass the test by instituting swift, clear, certain and powerful discipline against this priest of his who has now expressed contempt for the entire teaching authority of the Catholic Church, including that of his Bishop. Go for it, Archbishop Listecki!
Posted by: doceo4186 -
Dec. 13, 2010 8:01 PM ET USA
Isn't the priest supposed to be an "image" of the brideGROOM, not the bride?
Posted by: dover beachcomber -
Dec. 13, 2010 7:49 PM ET USA
He understands "no". He just doesn't think he has to obey. I don't suppose any of the bishops he has served under has given him any reason to think otherwise.
Posted by: AgnesDay -
Dec. 13, 2010 6:28 PM ET USA
What part of "No" does he not understand?
Posted by: Obregon -
Dec. 13, 2010 1:35 PM ET USA
Two points. All one has to do is to look at who appointed him "spiritual director" of the Archdiocese to understand why this man wrote what he wrote. My question now is, where is his bishop? Again and again, dissenters would not be saying openly what they really think if bishops would deal with them, shall I say, less "pastorally."