Skip Navigation Links
Home
Donate
Free News via Email
Subscribe for a Friend
Send News Tip
Contact Us
Search
About Us
Is California Catholic Daily important to you?
You can help keep us online!
HELP WANTED ADS
See All Help Wanted Ads
Submit Help Wanted Ad
POSITIONS WANTED ADS
See Position Wanted Ads
Submit Position Wanted Ad
Churches Worth Driving To
* Submit Your Church *

News from the Trenches
Grow a uterus!...
Advertise with us
Currently more than 150,000 visitors read CalCatholic.com
Servant of God! Father John Hardon, S.J.
Refuse to Choose! Women deserve better!
Changing Times! Holistic approach in education.
CLASSIFIED ADS
See All Classified Ads
Submit Classified Ad
CALENDAR
See All Calendar Items
Submit Calendar Item
LATEST FEEDBACK
German prelate to head Vatican doctrinal congregation KENNETH M. FISHER there you go again, using the word 'hereti... [max - 7/6/2012 6:45:51 PM]
Same-sex attractions in youth Retaction Gene, you are correct in what you are saying. I h... [Mark from PA - 7/6/2012 6:31:16 PM]
Will she be removed? Archbishop Jose Gomez is a wonderful bishop. Shame on whoev... [Shirley J. Schultz - 7/6/2012 5:59:07 PM]
A Constitutional wreck Constitutional validity depends entirely on an educated, pro... [JLS - 7/6/2012 4:55:28 PM]
Parents should not block vocations "Why does he call so few?" by Bob One: I cannot fathom how ... [JLS - 7/6/2012 4:46:36 PM]

Links to Other Sites
Prior Site Archives
Article Archives

No answer

San Francisco layman quizzes Episcopal bishop over use of church by ‘Roman Catholic womanpriest’


On Feb. 28, California Catholic Daily published the story “No Time for Contrasting Viewpoints,” which reported on the screening of the anti-Catholic film “Pink Smoke over the Vatican” at Convent of the Sacred Heart High School in San Francisco. In addition to screening of the movie, the school invited a woman named Victoria Rue to address the students on the content of the film. Rue, one of the “Roman Catholic Womenpriests” profiled in the film, has been excommunicated and is an open lesbian. In the course of researching the story, it was discovered that Rue was being allowed to celebrate “Masses” as a “Roman Catholic Woman Priest” twice a month at Trinity Episcopal Church in San Francisco.

Allowing an excommunicated Catholic woman to celebrate “Mass” as a “Catholic priest” in an Episcopal Church struck at least one San Francisco Catholic as surprising, and on March 1, he sent the following letter to the Most Reverend Marc Andrus, Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of California, requesting clarification:

Greetings, Your Grace!

I write to you with a concern and two questions. I am a San Francisco Catholic. I recently learned that Ms. Victoria Rue, who describes herself as a "Roman Catholic Woman Priest” is offering what she calls “Masses” at Trinity Episcopal Church in San Francisco.

Of course you know that the ordination of women is not recognized by the Roman Catholic Church. You probably also know that women, including Ms. Rue, who have celebrated rituals by which they claim to be ordained as “Roman Catholic Woman Priests” are excommunicated from the Roman Catholic Church.

This being so, I ask: why is Ms. Rue allowed to celebrate what she calls “Masses” in an Episcopal Church?

The Trinity Episcopal website's "Services" page says:?10:30 A.M. Sophia in Trinity (2nd & 4th Saturdays of the month) Sophia in Trinity is an inclusive community welcoming everyone including all those on the margins and especially those marginalized by the Roman Catholic Church: LGBT people, as well as those who are divorced, remarried, those who witness to reproductive rights, and all those seeking justice, equality and the integrity of creation. Find out more on our Sophia at Trinity page. When one follows the instructions and goes to, Trinity Episcopal's "Sophia in Trinity" webpage one is directed to http://www.sophiaintrinity.org/, which says:?"Bi-monthly Feminist Masses at the chapel of Trinity Episcopal Church. Click here to learn more" and "Presider: Victoria Rue, M.Div., Ph.D, Roman Catholic Woman Priest."

This would seem to me to be ecumenically insensitive at the least, and worse, could cause the uninformed to believe that what is being celebrated is a genuine Roman Catholic Mass.

That’s my concern. My questions are: 1) Is this a local initiative on the part of Trinity Episcopal, or is it a policy formulated or agreed to at the Diocesan level? and 2) Was the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of San Francisco consulted before these “Masses” were allowed to take place?

A response is respectfully requested.

Your son in Christ,

Gibbons J. Cooney


As of March 26, Bishop Andrus had not responded to the letter.

But, between March 7 and March 10, the Trinity Episcopal website was changed and the “Sophia in Trinity” and “Services” pages were taken offline. The “Services” page has been replaced by a “Worship Schedule” page, which continues to list Ms. Rue’s event as being held twice monthly. It is unclear if the changes have anything to do with the letter sent to Bishop Andrus.


READER COMMENTS

Posted Monday, March 28, 2011 12:58 AM By charlio
Interesting, that the Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI was accused - largely by secular forces that couldn't care less about salvation - of "trolling" for Anglicans in promulgating an Apostolic Constitution to establish "Personal Ordinariates" -- similar to dioceses -- to oversee the pastoral care of those who want to bring elements of their Anglican identity into the Catholic Church with them.

Posted Monday, March 28, 2011 4:08 AM By Thomas Edward Miles
We all know that there is no such office as a women priest in the Latin Rite, so, who cares what this women does, she can say her so called mass standing on her head for all I care, what is the big deal? The important question is, is there a second collection?!

Posted Monday, March 28, 2011 5:43 AM By St. Christopher
Well, what can be expected here? The Episcopal Church, is not a church, at all, being formed on the basis of Henry VIII's demand for a divorce. An ocean of true-Catholic blood and pillage, also the gift of Henry and daughter Elizabeth, adds a further foundation to that church's heritage. Those Anglicans coming to the Roman Catholic Church are now becoming Christians for the first time. Those within the Episcolpal Church must, and do, distrust and dispise the true Catholic Church, so the use of "Womenpriests" for its "mass" is not at all surprising.

Posted Monday, March 28, 2011 6:26 AM By Canisius
Mr. Cooney probably will not get a response whenever a liberal is cornered rarely do they have the guts to give honest answers. If the local Catholic Diocese had courage they would halt all communications witht the Espiscolpalian sects

Posted Monday, March 28, 2011 6:49 AM By William Hutson
The Holy Euchrist is not limited to a "genuine Roman Catholic Mass."

Posted Monday, March 28, 2011 7:11 AM By Amy
Thank you Mr. Cooney for bringing this to the attention of the public. Has Archbisohp Neiderauer spoken out about this? Why is it allowed to continue? Do rogue masses like this take place in other diocese in Northern California? Surely Cardinal Levada must know about this. Why the wall of silence?

Posted Monday, March 28, 2011 8:32 AM By The Truth Hurts
Perhaps Trinity Episcopal should live up to their pridefully touted claims of inclusive diversity and also invite the "Workshop Schedule" services of Scott Hahn to lead a Catholic Bible Study for Victoria Rue and others to Rome Sweet Home.

Posted Monday, March 28, 2011 8:41 AM By 1abqdad
The sad reality is that the Episcopalian Church in the US welcomes liberal heretics like Ms. Rue. The recent comments of lesbian female bishops within their church are disturbing at best and insulting at worst. When you add the SF connection, the story is complete. The primary question is "Why allow anything that claims to be Catholic?" THAT is the issue. It is obvious that it is a slam against the Church. The problem is that any publicity would be counter productive in such an evil place. The answer is prayer.

Posted Monday, March 28, 2011 9:58 AM By Anne T.
William Hutson, when apostolic succession is broken the "Eucharist" is no longer the Holy Eucharist and Christ does not trasubstantiate the bread and wine. It is just bread and wine. Only those who are just in schism but have apostolic succession, such as the Orthodox priests and bishops have a valid Eucharist. Those their bishops ordain have a valid Eucharist, but they too can only be men. Thus some of the high Anglican priests have a valid Eucharist since some were ordained by Orthodox bishops from what I have heard. I am not sure the Orthodox bishops are ordaining any Anglican priests or bishops any more, though, perhaps they are in England. In England and Australia both the Orthodox and Anglicans have a strong devotion to Our Lady of Walsingham and have collaborate with Roman Catholics in establishing chapels and churches with devotions to her.

Posted Monday, March 28, 2011 10:08 AM By Tom Byrne
Whoa there, St. Christopher: Anglicans are indeed Christians, as is anyone baptized with the Trinitarian formula. Individual Anglicans have been and are quite splendid Christians (C.S. Lewis, Dorothy Sayers, Samuel Johnson), despite the ill-deeds of the Tudors and the present disorders. We need to welcome them as returning brethren, and not hold their ancestors' sins against them.

Posted Monday, March 28, 2011 10:22 AM By Anne T.
I should have said in my last post that the Anglicans, Othodox and Roman Catholics collaborate in the DEVOTIONS to Our Lady of Walsingham, such as buying each other's medals, exchanging historical information, etc., not necessarily collaborating in the building of chapels and churches; although I doubt any have been told not to sell wood, etc. for church building to each other, so in that sense they probably collaborate with each other on the building of chapels and churches.

Posted Monday, March 28, 2011 10:51 AM By Fr. Gregory Coiro
Good job, Gibbons!

Posted Monday, March 28, 2011 1:32 PM By Seth
Only the Diocese Catholic Bishop can give permission for a Catholic Mass to be said outside of a Catholic Church. The celebrant must be an ordained Catholic Priest in accord with the "Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition". I hope Gibbons sent a copy of her letter to the Catholic Diocese Bishop as well as the Vatican. Since the Episcopalian bishop has no authority in the Catholic Church, at best he is giving out false information, at worst he is diliberately teaching lies to those who trust him. He also needs to be told to read the "Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition" - which contains the Doctrine of the Catholic Church, and is the ONLY catechism from the Magisterium.

Posted Monday, March 28, 2011 3:39 PM By Elizabeth
Gibbons, the Holy Spirit is CERTAINLY on your shoulder!!!!!

Posted Monday, March 28, 2011 7:58 PM By gravey
TEM, To answer your question, there was a second collection in support of COURAGE.

Posted Monday, March 28, 2011 10:53 PM By contrary
Thank you Gibbons J. Cooney. You asked the right questions. The Episcopalian bishop really should try to answer them, if he can.

Posted Tuesday, March 29, 2011 12:54 AM By Kenneth M. Fisher
William Hutson, In 1972, I was the Republican Nominee for the U.S. House of Representatives, 19th CD. As such, I was approached by Law Enforcement and they told me that at that time the Demonic worshipers were paying over ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS for a consecrated host. When I then asked them how much they were paying for an Episcopalian host, they told me ZERO nada, nilch! That should answer your ill advised comment above. God bless, yours in Their Hearts, Kenneth M. Fisher

Posted Tuesday, March 29, 2011 10:09 AM By Bud
I can't help but notice the connection (?) between these fake "women priests" and so many of them declaring themselves lesbians. This of course is one of the prime markers of those female Episcopal bishops and priests declaring changes to their doctrines to justify and confirm their validity. It also reminds me of the Obama appointment of elitist and gay activists to his czardom. This world is full of hypocracy.

Posted Tuesday, March 29, 2011 11:18 AM By Joseph Jaglowicz
Mr. Cooney opines that Trinity Episcopal's action is "ecumenically insensitive at the least." I guess it depends on whose ox is being gored. Did Mr. Cooney complain about B16 setting up an Anglican Ordinariate? St. Christopher writes that "Anglicans coming to the Roman Catholic Church are now becoming Christians for the first time." Hyperbole aside, this statement constitutes heresy. Baptism makes one a Christian. (I'd remain anonymous, too, for displaying such a malinformed opinion.) William Hutson writes, "The Holy Eucharist is not limited to a 'genuine Roman Catholic Mass.'" So very true. The primitive churches did not have ordained ministry, yet we surely would not assert they lacked valid eucharistic liturgies at which they received the body and blood of Christ in their communal acts of thanksgiving to God the Father through Jesus the High Priest. Anne T., like too many poorly catechized Catholics nowadays, displays a lack of understanding of the teaching about apostolic succession. The laying on of hands by validly ordained bishops does not guarantee orthodoxy; heretics have been validly ordained to the Roman Catholic bishopric. The doctrine on transubstantiation is an inadequate attempt to explain the mystery of the holy eucharist. Our primitive ancestors in the faith believed in the WHAT of the eucharist without believing they had to explain the HOW of the eucharist. The human mind and language is simply incapable of grasping, much less explaining, a mystery. At least Anne T. did not use the trite phrase "confecting the eucharist": this makes the RC presbyter/bishop come across as some kind of candymaker! Kenneth M. Fisher's anecdote does not prove one thing or the other about the validity/authenticity/genuineness of an Episcopal "consecrated host" versus a Roman Catholic "consecrated host".

Posted Tuesday, March 29, 2011 5:30 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
Joseph, Do you accept the FACT that the Church has clearly stated that Anglican Orders are not valid? If so, you must accept that FACT that Anglican sacraments are not valid! I have many ex-Anglican priest friends some of whom were bishops and archbishops, including now validly ordained Catholic priests, and they would not agree with you at all. I only gave that ancedote, as you call it, to demonstrate the fact that the Devil worshippers do not recognize their consecrations either, but apparently you do. From what I have read in your comments so far, I would venture to say that Ann T. knows the REAL Faith far better than you do! God bless, yours in Their Hearts, Kenneth M. Fisher

Posted Wednesday, March 30, 2011 10:36 AM By Larry
To Mr. Jaglowicz: Your post is so full of errors I hardly know where to begin. "The primitive churches did not have ordained ministry, yet we surely would not assert they lacked valid eucharistic liturgies at which they received the body and blood of Christ..." False. The "ordained ministry," that is the priesthood, has been around since Jesus Himself ordained the first priests immediately before and after His death/resurrection. "The laying on of hands by validly ordained bishops does not guarantee orthodoxy..." No sir, and nobody thinks it does. It guarantees that the recipient has the priestly power to confect the Eucharist and absolve sins. Good catechesis is supposed to help achieve orthodoxy, though it does not "guarantee" it. "The doctrine on transubstantiation is an inadequate attempt to explain the mystery of the holy eucharist." What, in your opinion, WOULD be an adequate explanation? "Our primitive ancestors in the faith believed in the WHAT of the eucharist without believing they had to explain the HOW of the eucharist." Whom are you talking about, cave men? If you mean the early Christians, they certainly knew the "what" and the "how" of the Eucharist. They gave us our understanding of it.

Posted Wednesday, March 30, 2011 8:19 PM By Anne T.
Thank you Kenneth Fisher for defending my position, and Larry too. To say that the early Church did not have ordained priests, as Joseph Jaglowicz did, is so much nonsense. What did he think Christ was doing when he ordained the Apostles in the Bible, and they in turn ordained others? Also, he totally misinterpreted what I wrote. I was refering to the fact that although the Eastern Orthodox churches are in schism from the Catholic Church, they do have a valid Eucharist, and anyone their valid bishops ordain have a valid Eucharist too, even though they too are in schism. I am sure any Anglican any Orthodox bishop would reordain must prove to him that they believe in the same doctrines the Orthodox Churches do. Otherwise they would not do it, unless the orthodox "bishop" was a complete apostate. Of course, I was and am using the term orthodox in this case with the capital "O" -- Othodox - and not using it in the sense of an orthodox Roman Catholic. Joseph Jaglowicz evidently does not know the different or does not accept the difference. I believe it is the latter.

Posted Wednesday, March 30, 2011 10:00 PM By JLS
First error, Joseph: You say primitive churches in a way that presumes they were not apostolic ... but they were. And the Apostles were not scattered but all in union with Christ and St Peter. How do we know this? Because Jesus said He prayed that they would not be scattered.

Posted Wednesday, March 30, 2011 10:19 PM By JLS
Anglican converts to Roman Catholicism may indeed become Christians for the first time in the case in which St Christopher prefaced this argument. This refers to the church formed on a divorce, namely that of Henry VIII. So, within the perspective of St. C., his conclusion is correct. But the question is whether it is objectively correct. Does a church calling itself Christian but which was made out of the institution of sacrilege a real objective Christian church? Does the false doctrine weigh more than the Sacrament of Baptism? Would this be subjective depending on each individual's response? If not to become Christians, then why would they bother to convert? Is there a degree of being Christian? Perhaps for these converts they each had a recent inkling that they might not be Christians after all. What of Christianity did they perceive to await them elsewhere than in Anglicanism? Is an egg a duck? Does an egg walk like a duck? Talk like a duck? Is it a duck before it is hatched? Or is it a duck egg? Can we compare this image with that of an unborn baby's personhood? Is Christianity fulfilled in the Anglican church or not? If not, then converting may well bring a soul into Christianity for the first time, like a duckling emerging through a cracked shell. The false religion is an idea serving as a shell to keep the duckling blind to the greater reality of Christianity ... What does each shielded soul desire?

Posted Wednesday, March 30, 2011 10:25 PM By JLS
In one breath, Joseph J. tells us that the mystery of the Eucharist cannot be explained; and then in another breath he criticizes Kenneth Fisher for providing an analogy. Cracking an ice statue is not too difficult. He also flails around in an attempt to bash Anne T. for her topical description of apostolic succession, and he leaves the mysterious impression that he is in the know of the mystery ... gnosticism is what it looks like to me. Joseph, you're basing your religion on your special knowledge instead of on faith.

Posted Thursday, March 31, 2011 6:10 AM By Canisius
Folks Jaglowicz is an NCR troll, truly hope that him and AM Church crowd break away and form their own heretic group

Posted Thursday, March 31, 2011 7:40 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
Mr. Jaglowicz is an obvious product of the Los Angeles Religious Education Congress. We hear errors such as "Jesus did not ordain anyone" expounded all the time at that event. Pray for him. God bless, yours in Their Hearts, Kenneth M. Fisher

Post your Comment
Name:
Email: (Optional: Will not display)
Comment:
 
Comments are limited to 1500 characters, and cannot contain offensive or libelous language. For security, comments cannot contain html tags, including < and > symbols - and NO URLS or LINKS. Comments will appear after they have been approved by the editor. Inclusion of your email address is optional so the editor may contact you.



Calcatholic Mobile
Optimized for your
mobile device













Visitors since January 1st, 2009:
javascript hit counter