Posted on 07/23/2011 3:11:46 PM PDT by marshmallow
This article from the New York Times trumpets the news that Catholic priests worldwide are rebelling against Vatican teaching forbidding women from being ordained. Guess what? The 'rebellion' consists of about 150 priests in the US and about 300 in Austria and some in Australia. Errr, that would be what percentage of the 400-500,000 priests worldwide? I'm sure the Vatican is extremely worried.
The galling thing about this push for women priests is that it comes from the very men who have been engineering an artificial crisis in the priesthood for the last few decades. When I was in England I visited different parishes every weekend and hob nobbed with the priests. They told me how bishops and seminary rectors would regularly reject young men because they were 'rigid' (code for orthodox) My own bishop rejected all convert clergy from the Church of England--even the celibates. Others spoke of how 'England had too many priests' and compared the situation to Peru where one priest covers a territory the size of Scotland and the 'core communities' are governed by the people with a 'catechist' in charge. They thought this was a wonderful thing and wanted to move their own dioceses to that 'model of ministry'.
Why was that? So that by engineering a crisis in vocations they hoped to force Rome to sanction the ordination of married men and women. I wish I were exaggerating, but they told me this themselves. What they wanted was a 'priest's house' for six or seven priests to live together and serve a whole deanery and the parishes would be led by 'lay catechists' who (of course) would be male or female. The lay catechists would determine the wishes of the people of God democratically and tell the priest what to do. In other words, "If Rome won't let us have women priests we'd rather have no priests at all."
I always found this hilarious and terrifying. The Bishops and high ranking clergy who thought this was so wonderful obviously had no experience of Protestant congregationalism with its in fighting, bickering and power struggles amongst the laity. Furthermore, they had no plan for how these lay leaders would be educated and trained, much less paid.
Finally, they had no clue how the whole thing could backfire against their own liberal ideals. What would they do when St. Hilda's parish was taken over by 'lay leadership' who turned out to be members of some exclusive new ecclesial movement? What would happen when the 'lay leadership' turned out to be a group of Duane Mandible-like Latin Mass conspiracy nuts? What would happen when the local charismatic ladies took over? You wanted lay women to be leaders. Did you really want that sort of lay woman? How would they get rid of them? Had they any recourse in canon law? Did any of these lay people take vows of obedience to their bishop?
It's a nightmare scenario and the (now aging) seventies priests and bishops are sleep walking into it with blissful expressions on their faces singing Kumbayah.
Did these priests think that St Paul was just kidding when he said that only men were to speak in church?
Why aren’t these rebellious priests simply ex-communicated? Seems like Rome would be saving itself a bit of trouble if it stopped tolerating such stuff.
This marxist egalitarianism—this denial of the natures of man and woman-—and this notion that God does not have a teleological reason for his creations is blasphemy and such a warped sense of understanding of human beings. Biology proves there is a difference in design and different natures in man and woman, as anthropology and history does.
There should be a division in roles of men and women and where there is a division they are flourishing societies, such as America proved. Russian practices which took the woman out of the home and put babies in daycares was a disaster. Social engineering that goes against the laws human nature never can work (Natural Law Theory).
Emotions don’t lend themselves well to leadership positions where emotion gets in the way of intellect—the way women are designed because of their roles as mother. Rare exceptions are just that—rare and should never determine an organization’s actions which are reasoned.
First of all, it’s the Church’s dictate that women keep as far away from the priesthood as possible. Jesus probably knew quite a few yentas in his day and he knew if these chicks took over his church all we’d hear about is obesity, drunkeness and too much salt and sugar in our diets.
If it ever happens, every female priest is going to resemble some horrible mix of Debbie Wasserman Shultz, Barney Frank’s sister (what’s her name? Ann something or other) and Hillary Rodham Clinton. No. Thank. You.
Yep, the Old Grey Lady would think those guys SHOULD be listened to.
You are right about the religious truth on the subject. I was just trying to use “reason” using “science” because the people who embrace all this idiocy have already rejected any Biblical truth. I am pointing out that they are ALSO rejecting logic, reason, and science based on laws of nature and reality.
That means—if they accept the ideology that “homosexual behavior is “good”, then they are fundamentally idiots and uneducated, besides being godless.
I’m only a cultural Catholic (lapsed in all other ways) and I idealize the beauties of the Church of my youth. About ten years ago, I witnessed my husband’s niece as an “altar girl.” Her behavior was so reprehensible that I vowed never to put my foot in a modern church again. And I haven’t, lol!
I feel the same way about women priests - can you imagine confessing to some pious yenta?! Not me, brother.
By the way, I think we agree on the Casey Anthony case.
The altar “girl” concept is right out of Marx ideology. It is to blur the line between male and female in the minds of boys and girls.....it is all about altering the worldview of children and that there is no proper roles for men and women—it is all cultural construct-— so they will accept a different design of nature than God’s design.
The Catholic Church was infiltrated by the Devil.....like everything is—it is no different.
I am working inside the Church to change it....wish me “luck”, but since I am working against the Devil, I am very humble about my chances of effecting “change”. Their adoption of “popular culture” is killing them....and the Truth. The Pope seems to get this “Age of Relativism” but many of the bishops and priests want to be perceived as “nice” and “inclusive” —the Pollyanna vision of “Truth” where you never point out sin and call it what it is. Either the Catholic Church is the one true Apostolic Church or it is a fraud. One thing is obvious—it has been infiltrated by the Devil. To what extent....we will see eventually, won’t we.
I wish you all the luck in the world - you have a tough job and I admire you for doing it.
Can I vent about another abomination? About two years ago I - yet again - was at a modern funeral Mass out of a sense of obligation. The priest did a eulogy (anathema in my youth!) and had obviously asked the grieving widow to give him some talking points. Well, it seemed the deceased was a good dancer! So good, in fact, that the priest began to show his moves all around the casket. He actually was dancing on the man’s grave.
I was next to a friend of mine - a very openly gay man but someone who went through Catholic School in the 1950s - and I could literally see the smoke coming out of his ears. I think the two of us could have literally exploded if that were physically possible.
Luckily, the man’s widow was too upset to notice any of these shenanigans.
Yes, the Devil is loose and among us.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.