Letter to the editor: Catholics should support women as priests |
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Catholics should support women as priests

I read with interest Roy Bourgeois’ column “Another scandal in the all-male priesthood” (Aug. 23, TribLIVE). Bourgeois, a former priest, has long supported the ordination of women as priests; his support was deemed by the church hierarchy as causing grave scandal for which he was ordered to recant.

Rather than being a scandalous proposal, Bourgeois’ perspective provides hope and positive action for fundamental change within the Catholic Church after the unfathomable sexual abuse perpetrated by priests on innocent children. The institutional power structure of the Church (males only) perpetuated this abuse by silence, subterfuge, intimidation from the moral high ground and mere relocation of priest abusers. Bourgeois was ultimately expelled from the priesthood. How disheartening and absurd that a priest is defrocked for advocating the ordination of women while priest pedophiles are relocated to another parish.

Catholics should ask themselves, or their parish priests, why women are not eligible for ordination. Why is one gender not worthy for such a role and service as a priest? In the context of institutionally maintained abuse by priests, is it not a legitimate consideration to stimulate change within Catholicism, impact the male-dominated power structure and bring a multitude of woman priests to heal the turmoil and disillusionment caused by priest pedophiles and their protector bishops?

David Momper


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.