36 Replies to “I Once Debated dismissed Maryknoll Priest Roy Bourgeois on CNN Here’s the Video.”

      1. You did a good job, Msgr. Pope. Just ignor people like Cassandra who is uneducated in Theology.

  1. You know there’s a theology behind why a woman can’t be priest. The theology is this: Adam failed Eve for not leading her away from the Tree of Death and since Christ is the “new Adam”, thus, He (the new Adam) is now leading the Bride (the Church) back into eternal life. Thus, no woman can become the “new Adam.” That would destroy the dynamic.
    For some people, theology is too much for them, so let’s make it simple:
    If I were to put on a show called “Joan of Arc” and some hairy male wanted to play the part of “Joan” then I really can’t allow it, because it would be truly lame. You see it’s that simple!
    Take for example the Blessed Virgin Mary, she is above all angels and saints yet Jesus did not give her the priestly office. Why? Again it goes back to theology: Jesus is the “new Adam” and Mary is the “new Eve.” It would be silly for Jesus (forgive me my Lord, I’ m trying to make the liberals understand this), again it would be silly for Jesus to give the priestly office to His mother. For His mother can not be the “New Eve” and the “New Adam” at the same time, BECAUSE it would BE lame.
    The whole creation is a “SHE” (this includes:male, female, children,etc.) God is a “HE.” You can not change that dynamic if you do than you turn creatures into God! This is why the whole world is mess up! Women want to become men, men want to become women! This is our psychosis!!!!!

      1. ….kind of. The theology is, as Monsignor stated, that Jesus chose male disciples and the Church cannot edit, redact, or change Jesus’ teaching. There are supportive, speculative reasons for this, some of which you have named. But the real focus should be on exactly what John Paul II said and what Msgr. Pope reiterated: the Church has no power to change Jesus’ teaching. That puts the argument on its best and surest theological footing and prevents Catholic teaching from becoming a straw man.

        As for the speculative supporting arguments you made (note: “speculative” doesn’t mean bad or tentative, it just means that it’s not absolute solid doctrine), I would be careful rooting the ordination of males in the sinful act of Adam. It goes deeper than that, and it should be rooted in the fundamental distinction between male and female that was present at creation, even before the original sin. I would look more toward Eph 5 and male headship.

  2. I’m shocked the moderator actually did a good job, sounding like he did some homework instead of just siding with the controversial one.

    Shame he got in that last bit of missinformation. He needs to read the Catechism and remember that no matter how called those women he’s met feel, “1578 No one has a right to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders.” (CCC). That goes for men too.

    This is a good reminder for me to improve my Catechesis and the need to explain things that were once obvious like why mommies can’t be daddies.

  3. Now since I gave away this theology, and I know some of you might be stealing my ideas to put in your books, thus, it would be nice to acknowledge the “Repent and believe the Gospel” person.

  4. The Blessed Mother (The Perfect Human Being who was only humna) was not called to be a priest by her Son Our Lord Jesus Christ!

  5. These tired old statements are really tedious as well.

    Fundamental teachings are simply not going to change…….get over it or get out!

    1. no get over it or get out! we need to grow! to come to greater understanding! to love more truly!

  6. Fantastic job, Monsignor! As a Catholic woman (and a convert from a Protestant faith that has female pastors), I feel obliged to add that I find nothing about Catholic teachings or practices sexist. I think that Mary’s role in the Church is a good example of why that accusation is wrong. Mary was nowhere near as important in my prior faith, and I think her prominence in Catholicism is something that non-Catholics often fail to appreciate.

  7. The answer is pretty simple.

    Priests are, in a fashion, icons of Christ.

    Christ assumed mortality as a man, not a woman.

  8. Here you can see dr Ellen C. Dubois, professor p.hd UCLA womens history, admit in her own words that the term “sexism” is a complete fabrication. Here is the quote:

    “…the very word that we use, the name that we give, we use the name “sexism” to name that problem. Ah… it was a word that didn`t exist in this period and when it was invented in the late sixties it was a deliberate imitation of “racism”… There`s “racism” and then theres “sexism” …”

    Source: “Birth of an independant woman” at 24.41
    Watch it here:


    Thank you again, Monsignore.
    Outstanding work.

  9. You got your butt kicked, Msgr.
    You gonna have to bring better game than that if you expect the “New Evangelization” to fair any better.

    1. I do not feel you got ‘your butt kicked’ however I do think you were granted very little time to respond to your oponent.

      To say ‘The Churc is sexist’ and ‘Women priest are the solution to all problems in the Church’ takes only a few seconds to say… but to respond validly might take a few minutes to explain correctly why these positions are clearly wrong.

      So in a way Roy Bourgeois clearly had an advantage over you Msgr. Pope, only becuase it was a 5 minute long debate where he could quickly attack and you had only a few moments to state your replies.


      @ Cassandra

      Well I am sure erudite people like you expect the New Evangelization to be a series of quick sentences and not of thoughtful discourses.

      Evangelization however is not a tv-show debate… it’s a spiritual and intellectual process.

      1. This debate reminded me of an old adage to the effect that a fool can raise more questions in one minute than a wise man can answer in a year…

      2. “you expect the New Evangelization to be a series of quick sentences and not of thoughtful discourses.”

        I’m not allowed to have thoughtful discourses on this site because I raise questions that make Msgr. uncomfortable. Thus I dare not speak of the New Evangelization.

        But I will say that Msgr got his butt kicked the moment he agreed to the format that he appeared on. Better to not appear in a forum you can’t win within than to do so and come out losing ground. Hopefully he learns from this.

        1. How did he “get his butt kicked?” Reveal this statement to me.
          Just because the other fake priest spoke louder, does not mean that he won the debate.
          Your argument has no substance!

  10. Fr. Roy’s thinking seems based on superficial reasoning. Another words, earthly thinking forms conjecture of this type. It fails to see the church humanity and divinity at the same time. Sad he is playing the many years in to draw support. Even un gatito like me understand this teaching. I am hard on him because he will disturb some of the catholics who are sitting on the fence. Great debate Monsignor Pope! Thank you

  11. God bless you Father for defending the faith. It pains me to see that other priest throwing his life away. What a waste.

  12. I enjoyed how Mr. Bourgeois just HAD to get the last word (despite the moderators’ objections; he did a very good job of being fair and listening to both sides). I also enjoyed how he wanted to advertise those websites – they’re “very important!” I wonder how many people he just deceived?

    Also, Mr. Bourgeois’s logic about the sexual abuse scandal is almost laughable. Women – as lovely as they are – are immune to abusing boys sexually, apparently. I’m not sure about the statistics of abuse (although I’m sure that, globally, abuse from a male is more frequent), but I almost guarantee that there still would’ve been a crisis if women were priests and leaders.

    And the priest shortage is not caused by an all-male priesthood. Look to the ultra-liberal Episcopal Church, which is shattering in front of our eyes. In the meantime, dioceses and religious orders embracing traditional Catholicism (small ‘t’) are thriving and have more seminarians than they have ever had in 40+ years.

    Monsignor, you did an excellent job for the little time you had. Bourgeois kept on interrupting you when you weren’t finished with the topic. I applaud your patience.

  13. I understand that our Lord Jesus chose 12 men disciples but he surrounded himself with women in a time where they were not considered . One of the 77 disciples were a woman, Tabitha. He gave us the Holy spirit and maybe he’ll guide us to a change.
    Our Lady is barely mentioned in the scriptures but she is all present in our catholic life.
    Just a reminder…..
    I read your blog daily, especially on sunday night when you always clarify the mass’s readings.
    Thank you for the guidance,

  14. Was he really born with the name Bourgeois or is he someone with a Freudian complex trying to find himself and feels a Marxist calling to save us from Catholic guilt. He comes across more as a southern protestant tele- evangilist than a Catholic preist by profession. He may as well be saying,” I rebuke you demon and command your sexist beliefs leave this body in the name of my conscience! Hallelujah! Amen.” “Heal! Heal!”

  15. This Bourgeois is full of himself….He cares not whom he leads astray.

    He does not care about equality…or women…or souls…or Christ….He only cares about himself.

  16. However compassionate he thinks he’s being, Fr. Bourgeois is actually undermining his professed desire for women’s equality. Much like arguments for same-sex “marriage”, Bourgeois’ call for women’s ordination requires drastically redefining the insitution in question. By subordinating magisterial authority to the whims of personal sentiment, he isn’t really advocating granting women access to the Catholic priesthood. Rather, he is predicating female ordination on the invention of a diminished priesthood bereft of moral authority.

    In other words, Bourgeois’ own argument refutes the claim that women’s ordination is about fighting sexism. Because a male-only priesthood is a consistent tenet of Catholic doctrine, one must deny the hierarchy’s magisterial role in order to justify women’s ordination. It’s ontologically impossible to ordain women to a priestly office on par with the male priesthood founded by Jesus. You can only ordain women to a human-made priesthood with radically diminished authority, which is not only sexism but sacrilege.

  17. This is not a debate in the Church that will continue. Bourgeois rejects Church authority. The Church has spoken and this matter is settled. He can start his own simulated church.

    Thank you Monsignor for standing with Christ and His Church.

  18. There were never any Levitical priestesses in the Old Covenant and there has never been any tradition of Priestesses in the New Covenant and Jesus was in no way a sexist when He chose 12 males as apostles.The women of our Church are indispensable,dedicated, and inspired in their ministries and offices..As a male I will never experience of carrying a child to term and giving birth but I do not think God is unfair to me – He just has a different plan for me. I thank God for inspiring the wisdom of the Holy Father when he says there will be no Priestesses in the Church.

  19. An important fact is that pagan religions often had pristesses. However early Christians, most of them of pagan heritage, did NOT ordain women, althoguh for a pagan a woman-priest would have not been something new, culturally.

    Evidently the early Christians, guided by the Apostles and disciples of the Apostles, clearly understood that ORDRAINED Priesthood was for men alone.

    Women are also priests in what is called the “UNIVERSAL Priesthood”, a calling thaty every Christian, man or woman is called to (and this universal priesthood goes back even to judaism).

    So to say that women could not be ordained because of ‘antiquated cultural notions’ is plainly wrong, since culturally there were many priestesses in Jesus times in the pagan world.

  20. One of the most telling parts of the interview was Mr Roy Bourgeois’ use of the my in front of God. Is he possessing God? Does he have different god than the Church? Or is it something else? In any case his whole postion seems rather self centered.

  21. “They feel called to the priesthood by God.”

    How does Roy Bourgeois – how do these women – know that *God* is calling these women? How do we know the impulse doesn’t come from somewhere else? Perhaps from our own vanity and pride? Or perhaps from a more disturbing source?

    In fact, he *doesn’t*. The Church is granted the authority to recognize vocations calls. And the Church’s authority rests on the teachings and precedents of Christ. And those teachings are precedents reaffirmed the Levitical tradition of ordaining only men as priests – though they transcended many other laws and traditions of the Old Covenant.

    The Church is not wrong about this. Roy Bourgeois is wrong. I hope and pray he comes to recognize that before his time on this Earth is over.

  22. Msgr. Pope, maybe i am too old to jump in the internet pool! what BHG sent , was absolute truth. i wonder if what i was trying to say, was not understood. i was saying that when we are around those who do not see clearly the truths of faith, we need to seek understanding and grow in wisdom and knowledge. to suggest that others get over it or get out, seems unloving to me. to those who come into my life and i hear from their lips words that proclaim something that i believe to not be true (i now have a list), many times i confront. i do a lot of praying about this. i do not believe that silence, or ignoring, or being condescending ,or behaving superior are answers to division or conflicting opinions.
    the replies on this web page are so exciting! those who speak from their souls do truly uplift their Christian brothers and sisters. i know that works for me! i join those replies that are so grateful for all you do in your service as a priest. thank you.

  23. Many moons ago – early-mid 1980s? – my mother and I watched a “60 Minutes” episode featuring a group of women who wanted to be priests. I can’t say that the particular group of women made a strong case for their cause. Even my teenaged self thought that writing articles for the bulletin was a rather lame justification.

    As I’ve observed the debate about female priests come up now and again, I’ve heard plenty of talk about what a priest does. Much of what a priest does on a day-to-day basis, however, doesn’t require a clerical collar: administering budgets, managing property and staff, running schools, providing counseling, publishing bulletins. All that stuff, while part of the reality of being a pastor, obscures what a priest really IS…someone who stands before us in persona Christi to bring to us (or perhaps bring us to) the Sacraments.

Comments are closed.