Steven P. Barrett"Women Catholic Priests:" Forever Forgetfully Femmes Faithful to Feminism: The Five F’s. (LINK)
July 19th 2008 05:22
By Steven Barrett
Some people are very, very, very S L O W learners. When was the last time the Catholic Church ever officially ordained a woman as priest -- knowing the already ordained deacon was a woman who snuck through the original vetting out and seminary system?
Don't bother looking it up. It's not in any reputable book on Church history. Trust me. I've studied Catholic Church history and it's just not in there. Not even the mythical "Pope Joan."
Sometimes it harder to tell which are tougher to dispel, lies or myths. Church historians will say heresies and point to the crusade against the Carthusians as proof. They were tough.
When you get ideological feminists, theology and egos mixed in together, well I'm not sure if even the Vatican always knows has to handle this when it comes to some American women. Don't get me wrong, I l ove the independent spirit of our women. We wouldn't have a country without them and their spirit. But not every spirit is necessary and in every venue or in this case, a Church and not just any Church.
It really ought to be a “no brainer.:“ Aren't there any old Puritans who know how to handle witches up in Boston because it looks like the gals who are about to be "ordained" as catholic priests this Sunday have been drinking something more potent than Kool Aid. Are they still brewing Tabitha's Brew up in Salem?
It was just my luck (or misfortune) to find out about this joke in the Boston Globe, hardly a “Catholic friendly” newspaper, and this goes back long before the pedophile/coverup scandals of recent unhappy memory. Even though Catholics of Irish descent wrote and still write for the Globe, it was, and still remains a Yankee Institution, (albeit owned by the New York Times these days.)
Stop the presses! If this lady’s going to be a priest and preach a homily after reading the Gospel, what’s she going to do when the Sunday’s reading touches on the sin of P R I D E.
Doesn’t the Globe instruct its reporters/editors to put quotation marks (hooks) around some events that remain somewhat dubious to say the least? This Marchant woman isn’t a validly ordained Catholic anything. It’s an impossibility. It all kind of reminds me of that song C & W singer Lorrie Morgan recorded around 20 years ago, “What part of no don’t you understand.”
Perhaps the Vatican ought to follow Major League Baseball’s example and trade these jokers to the Anglicans for real bishops who know what’s really what. Sanctions will lead to messy public fights that Rome will win hands down in any canonical courts, but lose in the fish wraps. Go for the trade. After all, there are at least three Anglican bishops who are ready to bolt for the bigger leagues.
This means the Big E: Excommunication. They won’t be burned at the stake in Boston’s Quincy Market. And it doesn’t mean they’ve been given an “E-ticket” on a hellish version of Disney’s “It’s a Small, Small World after all.” They won‘t even hear anyone singing “It’s a hot, hot place after all.” They can always be welcomed back, but they’ve got to give up their “orders”. They’ve been warned in advance and that means the Vatican and Sean Cardinal O’Malley, OFM, of Boston’s not messing with this trio of fakers.
Hell, oops, I would extend the invitation to get those E-Tix to any Catholic who attends their “ordination” ceremony and “mass” and receives “communion” during this travesty. Such acts make them willing accomplices.
I don’t care what church anyone belongs to, if it has valid traditions, treasures its ordinations, and teachings, it takes a hell of a lot of arrogance for a bunch of “it’s because we feel like it” folks to put their Church or denomination’s feet to the fire for such selfish reasons. Well, that’s what happened to the Episcopal Church in the US back in the Seventies … and look where that’s taken the entire Anglican Communion. I need say no more! I used to be with them when I was younger and a lot less as well informed. (Sigh)
There's an old saying, “Roma locuta est, causa finita est.” When Rome speaks, the case is closed. I‘ll bet a lot of Protestant bishops wished they had that much clout!.
Ever reliable New England Yankees of Puritan stock: Notice the word “rent.” Need I say more? They haven’t changed. After all, even those these women are renegades, outlaw faux priests, they’re still considered “Papists.” (That’d sure surprise the Pope. With such “papist” loyalty from these gals, he doesn’t need any more Judases.)
Remember the name those “priests” gave themselves, “Roman Catholic Womenpriests?”
That title’s a misnomer to begin with. The term Roman Catholic doesn’t exist in official Catholic documents and titles for the Church. It’s Catholic, meaning universal. No American Catholic, No German Catholic, No anything but Catholic. The term “Roman Catholic” originated from High Church Anglicans who wanted to retain their Catholic traditions and identity within the wider Anglican Communion, but they didn’t want to be confused with the Church in Rome or its bishop, the Pope. This wasn’t just a matter of prejudice, but a practical means of saving one’s neck, even if that neck was Protestant before England “emancipated” Catholics in the 1830s. The name stuck and even Catholics on both sides of the “pond” grew used to it. But it’s not a proper title. Just a culturally accepted “nickname” of sorts. As for “women priests?” Enough said.
I’ve got a better name for this “order.” Let’s call them the "Women Catholic Priests:" Forever Forgetfully Femmes Faithful to Feminism: The Five F’s. They can’t even pass a basic Religion 101 course.
Some people are very, very, very S L O W learners. When was the last time the Catholic Church ever officially ordained a woman as priest -- knowing the already ordained deacon was a woman who snuck through the original vetting out and seminary system?
Don't bother looking it up. It's not in any reputable book on Church history. Trust me. I've studied Catholic Church history and it's just not in there. Not even the mythical "Pope Joan."
Sometimes it harder to tell which are tougher to dispel, lies or myths. Church historians will say heresies and point to the crusade against the Carthusians as proof. They were tough.
When you get ideological feminists, theology and egos mixed in together, well I'm not sure if even the Vatican always knows has to handle this when it comes to some American women. Don't get me wrong, I l ove the independent spirit of our women. We wouldn't have a country without them and their spirit. But not every spirit is necessary and in every venue or in this case, a Church and not just any Church.
"Catholic Priests"?
It really ought to be a “no brainer.:“ Aren't there any old Puritans who know how to handle witches up in Boston because it looks like the gals who are about to be "ordained" as catholic priests this Sunday have been drinking something more potent than Kool Aid. Are they still brewing Tabitha's Brew up in Salem?
It was just my luck (or misfortune) to find out about this joke in the Boston Globe, hardly a “Catholic friendly” newspaper, and this goes back long before the pedophile/coverup scandals of recent unhappy memory. Even though Catholics of Irish descent wrote and still write for the Globe, it was, and still remains a Yankee Institution, (albeit owned by the New York Times these days.)
"We're part of a prophetic tradition of disobeying an unjust law," said Gabriella Velardi Ward, a 61-year-old Staten Island architect with two children and five grandchildren, who will be ordained along with Gloria Carpeneto of Baltimore and Mary Ann McCarthy Schoettly of Newton, N.J.
Ward said she has wanted to be a priest since age 5, and that she actively considered becoming a nun before deciding that the priesthood was her calling because she wants to be able to celebrate Catholic sacraments.
"Excommunication or not, I will still be a validly ordained priest and still will be able to serve the people of God," she said.
Ward said she has wanted to be a priest since age 5, and that she actively considered becoming a nun before deciding that the priesthood was her calling because she wants to be able to celebrate Catholic sacraments.
"Excommunication or not, I will still be a validly ordained priest and still will be able to serve the people of God," she said.
Stop the presses! If this lady’s going to be a priest and preach a homily after reading the Gospel, what’s she going to do when the Sunday’s reading touches on the sin of P R I D E.
The women are to be ordained by Dana Reynolds, a California woman who was consecrated as a bishop in Germany in April.
Reynolds and the others are part of an organization called Roman Catholic Womenpriests, which has been holding ordination ceremonies for women since 2002; the organization says there are now 28 women Catholic priests in the United States.
Among those already ordained is Jean Marchant, a former director of healthcare ministry for the Archdiocese of Boston, who with her husband presides over a small congregation that has a weekly Catholic Eucharist in a Protestant church in Weston.
Reynolds and the others are part of an organization called Roman Catholic Womenpriests, which has been holding ordination ceremonies for women since 2002; the organization says there are now 28 women Catholic priests in the United States.
Among those already ordained is Jean Marchant, a former director of healthcare ministry for the Archdiocese of Boston, who with her husband presides over a small congregation that has a weekly Catholic Eucharist in a Protestant church in Weston.
Doesn’t the Globe instruct its reporters/editors to put quotation marks (hooks) around some events that remain somewhat dubious to say the least? This Marchant woman isn’t a validly ordained Catholic anything. It’s an impossibility. It all kind of reminds me of that song C & W singer Lorrie Morgan recorded around 20 years ago, “What part of no don’t you understand.”
The organization says its ordinations are valid because its first bishops were ordained by Catholic bishops in good standing - bishops whose names have not been released because they would face sanction by the Vatican.
Perhaps the Vatican ought to follow Major League Baseball’s example and trade these jokers to the Anglicans for real bishops who know what’s really what. Sanctions will lead to messy public fights that Rome will win hands down in any canonical courts, but lose in the fish wraps. Go for the trade. After all, there are at least three Anglican bishops who are ready to bolt for the bigger leagues.
Catholic Canon Law
There's the Good Book and there's the Canon Law Book.
"... the Vatican says the ordinations are illegal under church law and yesterday the Archdiocese of Boston sent an e-mail to all priests declaring that women play key roles in the church, but cannot be priests.
"Catholics who attempt to confer a sacred order on a woman, and the women who attempt to receive a sacred order, are by their own actions separating themselves from the church," the archdiocese said. "As a faith community rooted in the loving ministry of Jesus Christ, we pray for those who have willingly fallen away from the church by participating in such activities."
"Catholics who attempt to confer a sacred order on a woman, and the women who attempt to receive a sacred order, are by their own actions separating themselves from the church," the archdiocese said. "As a faith community rooted in the loving ministry of Jesus Christ, we pray for those who have willingly fallen away from the church by participating in such activities."
This means the Big E: Excommunication. They won’t be burned at the stake in Boston’s Quincy Market. And it doesn’t mean they’ve been given an “E-ticket” on a hellish version of Disney’s “It’s a Small, Small World after all.” They won‘t even hear anyone singing “It’s a hot, hot place after all.” They can always be welcomed back, but they’ve got to give up their “orders”. They’ve been warned in advance and that means the Vatican and Sean Cardinal O’Malley, OFM, of Boston’s not messing with this trio of fakers.
Cardinal O'Malley
Hell, oops, I would extend the invitation to get those E-Tix to any Catholic who attends their “ordination” ceremony and “mass” and receives “communion” during this travesty. Such acts make them willing accomplices.
I don’t care what church anyone belongs to, if it has valid traditions, treasures its ordinations, and teachings, it takes a hell of a lot of arrogance for a bunch of “it’s because we feel like it” folks to put their Church or denomination’s feet to the fire for such selfish reasons. Well, that’s what happened to the Episcopal Church in the US back in the Seventies … and look where that’s taken the entire Anglican Communion. I need say no more! I used to be with them when I was younger and a lot less as well informed. (Sigh)
There's an old saying, “Roma locuta est, causa finita est.” When Rome speaks, the case is closed. I‘ll bet a lot of Protestant bishops wished they had that much clout!.
Ch. of Covenant
Boston's Church of the Covenant
The ordination will be Sunday afternoon in Church of the Covenant on Newbury Street in Boston's Back Bay. The church is affiliated with two Protestant denominations, the Presbyterian Church (USA) and the United Church of Christ.
The interim pastor of Church of the Covenant, the Rev. Jennifer Wegter-McNelly, said the congregation decided to rent its historic space, with Tiffany windows depicting women of the Bible, at a nominal fee to show support.
The interim pastor of Church of the Covenant, the Rev. Jennifer Wegter-McNelly, said the congregation decided to rent its historic space, with Tiffany windows depicting women of the Bible, at a nominal fee to show support.
Ever reliable New England Yankees of Puritan stock: Notice the word “rent.” Need I say more? They haven’t changed. After all, even those these women are renegades, outlaw faux priests, they’re still considered “Papists.” (That’d sure surprise the Pope. With such “papist” loyalty from these gals, he doesn’t need any more Judases.)
Remember the name those “priests” gave themselves, “Roman Catholic Womenpriests?”
That title’s a misnomer to begin with. The term Roman Catholic doesn’t exist in official Catholic documents and titles for the Church. It’s Catholic, meaning universal. No American Catholic, No German Catholic, No anything but Catholic. The term “Roman Catholic” originated from High Church Anglicans who wanted to retain their Catholic traditions and identity within the wider Anglican Communion, but they didn’t want to be confused with the Church in Rome or its bishop, the Pope. This wasn’t just a matter of prejudice, but a practical means of saving one’s neck, even if that neck was Protestant before England “emancipated” Catholics in the 1830s. The name stuck and even Catholics on both sides of the “pond” grew used to it. But it’s not a proper title. Just a culturally accepted “nickname” of sorts. As for “women priests?” Enough said.
I’ve got a better name for this “order.” Let’s call them the "Women Catholic Priests:" Forever Forgetfully Femmes Faithful to Feminism: The Five F’s. They can’t even pass a basic Religion 101 course.
| 72 |
| Vote |
Shared on
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by Morgan Bell
Deep Pencil
Current Business News
Movie Train
Artist Quirk
or is this all about upholding traditions?
Comment by Damo
For the Sake of Argument
My Apologetics
But shouldn't they be called Priestesses?
Comment by S.L.
The Political Brief
Good, informative post, Steven.
Comment by tlcorbin
Coffee Quip
A Global Citizen
Paranormal Paranormal
Is Why
Alaska Chronicle
For the sake of continuity, traditions needs to remain sacrosanct, inviolable, immutable and just plain left alone.
Women can be priests in another religious institution where they can make a positive contribution, rather than a distracting statement among Catholics.
Comment by Anonymous
Catholic Tradition, which is older than the full Bible (that arose from both oral and written tradition kept by the Church during the pagan years up to Constantine's elimination of persecutions) has always upheld the male-only priesthood.
Part of that Tradition, teaches that the priest must be a true representative of Christ "in persona Christi" -- meaning obviously the minister of the sacramental consecration of the elements of bread and wine into the actual Body and Blood of Christ (through the power of the Holy Spirit). Of course, what we visually see through our human eyes, are what the Church calls the "accidents" -- which, admittedly, an old term for describing how the Lord wanted us to take him fully in the fullest and most intimate way possible, by eating. Remember there's also a Passover Tradition tie in all of this.
Hey, any fellow Catholics out there who can help me along or correct me if I'm messing up?
Seriously. Jesus knew well in advance he was going to have a tough time getting people to accept "whoever eats of my body and drinks of my blood." (Jn 6) This is when he had his first real recorded loss of disciples who said "these are difficult sayings." And they were because of the Law which proscribed cannibalism. And where did the Law come from to the Jews: From God, Whom Christians recognize in three persons, though that was deliberately not made fully known until after Christ resurrected from the dead.
Still, Jesus lost disciples and the few who did stay with him at that moment in the Gospel, were apparently only the 12 Apostles, and when he asked Peter if he'd too leave, Peter responded, "where would we go, who would we follow." Peter had (perhaps somewhat reluctantly, being a very steadfast adherent to the Jewish dietary laws, etc., nevertheless pretty much "got it" and gave Christ his loyalty. Of course, we know it was shaken, right after the Last Supper. But the restoration of Peter's loyalty is another matter.
The bottom line here is the "apostolic succession" which Christ fully intended. He only founded one church, and on his last night, he desperately prayed that it would stay united. This doesn't just mean only the constant splintering within Protestantism following the Reformation, particularly within congregationally organized, and other non-hierarchically structured denominations -- but all branches, including some arch-arch Catholic organizations that broke off. (They remained in good status with the Vatican UNTIL they started consecrating their own bishops. It really becomes a "biggie" when bishops who say they've broken or refuse to accept Rome's orders, abuse their authority (granted by a higher authority, the Holy See and the Pope himself) and start ordaining men -- or as in this case -- illicitly approved women for the priesthood.
There's no way this will change. Married priests? That's never been as big an issue as people have made it out to be. But that's another matter.
I hated to give such a long reply on a blog because of the nature of these forums -- but this is one of "those issues" which if you goof up on, there'll be hell to pay. Pun intended!
As for the word "priestess," that too, can't and won't sail because of what I mentioned above, those key Latin words, "...in persona Christi ..."
There's a reason why Jesus didn't pick women to be priests. And it all centers on what happened on Holy Thursday and Good Fri day. Yes, the Blessed Mother and Mary Magdalen were in attendance at Pentacost, and were apostolic witnesses, but not, nor ever, intended to be priests.
Christ threatened the existing Jewish Temple establishment enough with what he preached and taught as the real reasons behind the miracles (which really ticked them off!, among other things.) But had he instituted anything smacking of a female clergy -- all of God's plans would've gone astray. All of them. Even those women mentioned in Acts were not the formal kinds of ordained Deacons we're familiar with. In that kind of a social system that was far more "sexist," and I mean far more than anything a woman in most western society faces today, Saul, Paul's conversion would've had to be expedited a lost faster than it had been. He grew to accept women helpers in an informal way, but he, too was a man of his times. It would've absolutely suicidal in that kind of an environment for the nascent Christians to go that far.
Which brings us to today (i.e. late 20th century to now.)
Had not been for the American Civil Rights movement, the "winds of a liberalizing spirit" blowing through Catholicism (in some areas) via Vatican II, the Student Revolt of the late 60s and the wholesale change in attitudes in almost all facets of life when a handful of Episcopalian women challenged their hiearchy and took advantage of a weak authority structure within Episcopalian ranks and Anglicanism in general ... issues like ones presently hammering at the Anglicans at Lambeth recently would've never surfaced.
Have Christians all of a sudden gotten some new wisdom concerning women's ordination, the liberalization of sexual teachings, and other matters that have torn the major mainline churches apart, and given the Catholic hiearchy some headaches (and little more, insofar as women's ordinations are concerned?)
THAT's even harder to prove than any reason why all of a sudden Catholics, and even their separated brethern liturgical/hierarchical Protestant brethern, should ever bow to the winds of polls instead of 2,000 years worth of proven Tradition, Scripture and Divine Guidance. My two cents!
Comment by S.L.
The Political Brief
Comment by Anonymous