Defrocking / Laicization

  • Thread starter Thread starter stoplooklisten
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Laicization should not be viewed as a punishment. There is nothing dishonorable about being a layperson. Quite frankly, priests who abuse their parishioners should be ex-communicated.
 
Referring back to the person’s statement to whom I was replying, I would say yes, this should be the foundational question being asked when discussing celibacy requirements for the office of priest or bishop.
 
Hodos said:
You are a priest forever after the order of Melchisedech
Click to expand...
All priests act in the place of Christ when they celebrate the sacraments, therefore this passage is relevant.

Matrimony is not recognized after death. Holy Orders is recognized in aeternam.

The OT foreshadows and often explains the NT.
Click to expand...
 
Hodos said:
Laicization should not be viewed as a punishment. There is nothing dishonorable about being a layperson.
Click to expand...
That’s like saying disbarring a lawyer or removing a president through impeachment shouldn’t be viewed as a punishment, because most people aren’t lawyers or presidents and there’s nothing wrong with not being one.
The point is that the person being removed from duty had earned a special position that is now taken away.
Quite frankly, priests who abuse their parishioners should be ex-communicated.
Click to expand...
When we start excommunicating people for committing serious sins, the Church will shrink to very tiny indeed.

The Church is a hospital for sinners. That includes priests who have done very bad things.
 
Last edited:
MockSock said:
All priests act in the place of Christ when they celebrate the sacraments, therefore this passage is relevant.

Matrimony is not recognized after death. Holy Orders is recognized in aeternam.

The OT foreshadows and often explains the NT.
Click to expand...
Actually it isn’t. The author of Hebrews specifically applied this Psalm to Christ to contrast his perfect and superior priesthood over earthly priests. To say this applies to man turns the author’s argument on its head. We would also fundamentally disagree on what is going on in the Eucharist and whether it is a re-offering of Christ’s sacrifice. But that’s a topic that has been addressed ad nauseum in other threads.
 
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself said:
When we start excommunicating people for committing serious sins, the Church will shrink to very tiny indeed.
Click to expand...
I agree with this statement very much; however, ex-communication is the Church’s means if discipline for serious sin with the intention of bringing one to repentance. I would argue that one who has abused his office to engage in serial abuse of the flock that they had charge over, or worse used their office to cover up abuses under their responsibility are hardened in their sin and are the audience that Paul would have recommended for discipline.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
That’s like saying disbarring a lawyer or removing a president through impeachment shouldn’t be viewed as a punishment, because most people aren’t lawyers or presidents and there’s nothing wrong with not being one.
The point is that the person being removed from duty had earned a special position that is now taken away.
Click to expand...
Yes and no. I agree with you that removing them from an office of special honor must be done, but I would be careful in saying that this is a punishment. Again there is nothing dishonorable with being a layperson and I would not want to equate the two concepts together. Additionally as I posted above, the grievous nature of this sin deserves the most serious sanction.
 
The thing is, you have no idea if each of these guys is repentant or not, and it’s a very individual thing.

Some of them have shown by their behavior, such as leaving the Church and continuing to live a dissolute lifestyle somewhee else, that they don’t seem repentant. I doubt excommunication would have any effect on bringing them back.

Others have shown some signs of remorse. I am aware of one pastor who turned himself in for a 40-year-old offense and voluntarily resigned. And there are quite a few who attempt or commit suicide - while that in itself is also a grave sin, it suggests their consciences may have been bothering the.

The only reason to excommunicate somebody would be if they were bringing a public disgrace upon the Church by continuous disobedience, like if McCarrick refused to stay hidden away living his life of prayer and penance and instead was flying around the world talking to the press.
 
Last edited:
Read up on Jude and see what his recommendation would be. Or read 1 Corinthians where Paul is addressing a man engaging in incest, a sin so disordered that not even the pagans would approve. If Paul takes a hard line against such a one, saying do not even eat with this person, what we he say about priests who have engaged in the type of
sexual misconduct being reported today? The Church is fine with denying the sacrament to those accused of grave sin such as those who are divorced and remarried but not this? Sorry, there is just no consistency.
 
Last edited:
I would expect fewer and fewer priests disciplined for sexual misconduct as more and more of those with serial or serious issues are uncovered and removed. And since the screening process has been greatly enhanced since all this broke, we have hope of a new generation of priests more committed than ever to sexual purity. And of course the newer priests see and experience the shame these sins have brought upon the church and themselves. When was the last time someone called you a child molester to your face? It happens to priests regularly now. This is and has been so awful, but the Lord is purifying his church. It hurts now, but good is ahead.
 
I don’t make my own interpretation of Scripture to put up against the interpretation and decision of the Magisterium, nor do I wish to interpret Scripture to come up with my own solution to deal with sinners when I’m not even a priest, let alone a bishop, cardinal or Pope.

I don’t think it’s very Catholic for us to interpret Scripture and use it as a basis to say, “The Church should do thus and so because I read Scripture and I think it says this.” That’s Protestant, to me.

God bless
 
If your argument is that it’s not Catholic to apply scripture to the Church, that explains why we are where we are.
 
Presuming you’re a layperson, you and I could apply Scripture to the Church all day and nobody would care what we think.
Also, you’re presuming the Magisterium is somehow too stupid to read and interpret Scripture properly and we’re supposed to rush in and help.

Sorry, but you come off as just another one of those people who think they know better than everybody in charge…which again is what led to Protestantism.

I’m muting the thread now, as further discussion on this is highly unlikely to be productive. Bye.
 
Last edited:
I think it is your own individual understanding of what scripture is saying, that we may be hesitating over. Is it ever possible that your understanding of scripture is skewed or misapplied? Are you always exactly right on understanding scripture AND in how to wisely apply it? I am most certainly not, although I wish I was! There is a humility in giving the church the benefit of the doubt, and a prideful danger in standing in judgement of it. I see the sins of these priests and condemn it, of course. But that is different from dismantling the church itself and replacing it with my personal vision of what it should be.
 
Last edited:
VeryBlessed said:
think it is your own individual understanding of what scripture is saying, that we may be hesitating over. Is it ever possible that your understanding of scripture is skewed or misapplied? Are you always exactly right on understanding scripture AND in how to wisely apply it? There is a humility in giving the church the benefit of the doubt, and a prideful danger in standing in judgement of it. I see the sins of these priests and condemn it, of course. But that is different from dismantling the church itself and replacing it with my personal vision of what it should be.
Click to expand...
Again, it is the complete lack of applying scriptural church discipline that led the Church to where it is. You can keep chalking up what I’m saying to the cop out of personal interpretation but you’re still dealing with a church that is hemorrhaging because the magisterium saw fit to place itself outside the authority of God’s Word. If the church had applied biblical church discipline she would not be dealing with the justifiable charges of negligence and covering up criminal behavior that she is facing now.
 
If you could see the sin in my own life, you might say about me, that I do not care about scripture and that I have placed myself outside the authority of Gods word. But it would not be true… I do care deeply about scripture and strive for a deeper and more genuine holiness. My contention is, so does the church. The people in the church sin terribly, but love for God and longing for God is still strong there.
 
Last edited:
Wikipedia has footnotes. Theoretically at least, every piece of information should be traceable to a source. In practicality, many pieces of information are traceable to sources.
 
Last edited:
Hopefully, instances of “defrocking” or laicization (from all types of causes) will be exceedingly rare in the future in all parts of the one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top