Can anyone help me? I seem to remember reading a quote from Archbishop John Ireland, about requiring celibacy for EC priests, and about his indifference towards any hardships caused thereby. I think it was something along the lines of the loss of a few souls can't compared with the benefits of the uniform discipline of celibacy.

Does anyone remember such a quote? I've looked and looked on the internet but can't find it.

Yes, I know the quote you are talking abou: a direct quote of the words of Bishop Ireland as recorded by Alexix Toth. I have seen it in books. Not sure about online.
However, the OCA history book used to be online. I remember downloading a copy of it years ago. But I have to search through my stuff to find it.
Is this a time sensitive request?

I found it!

You can find the quote in a book titled, "Making the Irish American: History and Heritage of the Irish in the United States".

In fact you can read the quote online (page 578): http://books.google.com/books?id=c5TPHak...M&hl=en#PPP1,M1

"The possible loss of a few souls of the Greek rite bears no proportion to the blessings resulting from uniformity of discipline."

Thanks grieco catolico.

Archenemy Ireland is sarcastically referred to as "The Father of the Orthodox Church in America"

Now that I think about, I think I saw it in yet another book, a couple years ago. I'll check next time I'm at the library.

Blessings,
Peter.

Peter B,

I've done more research.

The quote does not appear to be a personal quote by Archbishop Ireland, but a statement from the United States bishops during a meeting in Setember 1893.

Consult the book, "The American Hierarchy and Oriental Catholics, 1890-1907" by Gerald P. Fogarty for more info.

From the "Clash of the Titans" article: http://www.cin.org/clash7.html


"The Roman Catholic archbishops met again in September of 1893 and addressed the issue of married priests in America. Cardinal Ledochowski had replied to Archbishop Corrigan's letter from the November meeting of 1892 and had stated that the married priests "might be retained pro tempore [for the time being], but that as far as possible Greek monks (i.e., Ruthenian Catholic) should be procured." The prudence of the Prefect was not a gift enjoyed by the American archbishops. In November of 1892 they had politely ignored Father Chanath's urgent plea. Now, not quite one year later, they scorned the worth of the Greek Rite Ruthenian Catholics. They resolved:

"that the presence of married priests of the Greek Rite in our midst is a constant menace to the chastity of our unmarried clergy, a source of scandal to the laity and therefore the sooner this point of discipline is abolished before these evils obtain large proportions, the better for religion, because the possible loss of a few souls of the Greek Rite bears no proportion to the blessings resulting from uniformity of discipline."

The die was cast. The Ruthenian Catholic Church in the United States could expect no sympathy from the Roman Catholic Church unless it conformed to the latter's discipline. The rightful place of the married clergy and their supporters among the Greek Rite faithful was resigned to the Orthodox, the "schismatic" Church."

Truly sad!

I am truly stunned to believe that the U.S. bishops of that time actually made this statement. How horrible!
May Our Lord have mercy on their souls.

I would like to point out that Cardinal Keeler did ask for pardon for the way Greek Catholics were treated by the U.S. hierarchy of that time: http://www.byzcath.org/75/19991003-keeler.html

Sometimes saying "We're sorry" just isn't enough. The damage done was irreparable. It exists to this day. Nothing of any value has been done to instruct Latins about the Christian East.

Until that happens arrogance and ignorance will unfortunately be the norm. I wonder if Cardinal Keeler regularly instructs Latin Catholics about the East?

Oh, I agree. We cannot go back in time and undo the damage, but we can make sure that it never happens again. Each of us, no matter where we live, can become God's instrument of educating others about the beauty and richness of the Christian East. I do that whenever the opportunity arises, and people do enjoy learning about another liturgical tradition.

Etnick,

It is very disrespectful to refer to a hierarch of the Church as an "archenemy." I wouldn't even say that about Cardinal Mahoney, though I'd like to!

And if I may be so bold, the burden of educating Latin Catholics about the East doesn't fall primarily on their fellow Latins but on Eastern Catholics themselves. I don't really think Cardinal Keeler, a Latin, should be blamed because he's not using all his time to educate people about a Rite of the Church not his own, and one that makes up an very small proportion of the Church in the United States and worldwide. It's just not terribly fair!

Alexis

Cardinal Mahoney is just as bad as Archbishop John Ireland was, no doubt?



Oh brother!

I guess those lazy Eastern Catholics really dropped the ball back in Archbishop Ireland's day.

Are you kidding me? It's one thing for a Latin rite Cardinal to apologize to a large audience of Eastern Catholics at a banquet, but what does he care beyond that? Something tells me he forgot about it when he woke up the next day.

If he was sincere in his apology at such a major event in the history of the BCC, shouldn't something have come out of it?

As far as Archenemy Ireland goes, well, who knows. I might still be Greek Catholic.