Sometimes stupidity just burns me. Especially coming from people who claim to be smart.
I wandered onto the sites of the Roman Catholic Womenpriests. Yeah, one word: womenpriests.
Kinda tells you what they're all about.
These are girls who got themselves "ordained" by some stray bishop and now are playing at being womenbishops and womenpriests, "ordaining" each other. Have at it girls, but the thing which burns me is calling it all "Roman Catholic." It's just, well, wrong and stupid. Call yourselves Old Catholics, New Catholics, American Catholics, Reformed Catholics, etc. But if you call yourselves Roman Catholics and then break with the primary mode of transmission of Roman Catholicism, the priesthood....you're stupid, at the very least. It hasn't been 1968 for a long time.
Rome says you can't ordain a woman, says it consistently and says it solemnly. So there it is. You can't baptize with gravy. You can't confirm by laying on of feet and anointing with Noxema. You can't marry five people at the same time. You can't consecrate the Eucharist with beer and rice cakes. You can't make a priest out of a female.
Hate it. Deny it. Defy it. But don't pretend to be a priest or bishop and then say it's "Roman Catholic." That's just...stupid.
__________________
1 comment:
Again, the RCC's authority system fascinates --fascinates me, anyway. Surely it is the most fascinating authority system ever. As "founded on the written Word of God" and "set forth infallibly" "to be held always, everywhere, and by all, as belonging to the deposit of the faith," belief in the prohibition of the sacrament of orders for women is binding on me -- by my baptism which was valid by the criteria held by the RCC. Baptised and Church are coterminous. ... Except for the law against ordination for married men, ain't nothing 'controversial' in the RCC specifically about being in communion with the sovereign pontiff and the bishops in communion with him. Catholic sex morals are for everyone by conscience, natural law (Humane vitae is address'd also to civil government, for instance, which is objectively bound to prevent the manufacture of contraception devices). All obligations for Catholics are incur'd by baptism -- and thereby are as ?formally though not as substantively binding for Methodists and Anglicans and Eastern Orthodox as for 'cradle' Catholics. Only our presumably "invincible" ignorance excuses us. Curiously, these truths aren't strongly taught to Catholics, as though eros for understanding would diminish implicit obedience, including acceptance of the Magisterium's right to interpret the religious things call'd "Catholic Church." (e.g., if I or anyone enter a Catholic sanctuary, the true meaning of what goes on there is the Magisterium's interpretation, no matter how difficult finding the Magisterium's interpretation may be on some matters; Jung's interpretation, or Hobbes' interpretation, must be a false interpretation. The traditional Irish Catholic practice of baptising an infant instantly after birth lest he die before baptism by the priest which occur'd anyway was presumably objectively disobedient but not reproved by the ordinary magisterium, because ---. Try to follow these clearly laid down threads and one ends in an aporia -- which is of tremendous value. One can learn so much about law etc by investigating the Catholic Church's authority system. Not that these are necessarily the most important realities -- which are left untaught by the teaching office, e.g. wherefore a Catholic sanctuary even after "the Council" feels much more "lived in" than a comparable Anglican (or Eastern Orthodox?) sanctuary (I think Tillich observes this occurs because of the exposedness of the Host in Catholic sanctuaries), or why even the most 'dissenting' RC can never feel any other Christian worship experience is really "church" for him or her, or why a strong music (e.g. African-American, or -Canadian, etc) can override formal(ist) assertions, so that an African-American RC mass is mush more like an African-American Episcopal or Baptist or Methodist service than like a Caucasian RC mass. To insist that the transubstantiation that occurs is still the thing going on in an African-American mass, as in a Korean RC mass or a Mexican mass or a mass on Martha's Vineyard is insistence (and you must understand better than I "insistence" in interpretation according to Heidegger). ... Islam presumably prohibits an African-American 'call to prayers' from a minaret -- to ensure sameness.
jpm
Post a Comment