Thursday, 12 May 2016

Rome WILL ordain women...

Look at these disgusting harridans...

I predict that within the next fifteen years women will be ministering, as priests, in Roman Catholic parishes. This is very good news indeed, not because I am in favour of women's ordination but because any move by pope Francis to undermine the bogus "one true church" claim has my every sympathy, and I cannot wait to witness the the sullen whinging of all those charlatans and frauds, the tradunculi, and anybody else who believes in the crap as they themselves witness their beloved "church" go the way of the Church of England. And I don't think that "saint" John Paul II would be spinning in his grave either, or Ratzinger when he kicks his ecclesiastical clogs, and may that be soon.

You can read the news here. Thanks to Ad Orientem for the link.

30 comments:

  1. I do not think it will be as soon as 15 years. It will take a bit longer than that, but I think that you are correct, it will come.

    This present Pope will set up a committee to study deaconesses, and they will come to the conclusion that the ancient order of deaconesses were not liturgical or sacramental, but will ask, "does this mean that we are bound by such ancient precedent?" But the Pandora's Box will have been opened; and it will not be closed.

    This present Pope, if he lives long enough, will be able to stack the deck to make certain that all following Popes will be of like minded in regards to the New Church. And the fact that he was elected in the first place does mean that this process has been underway for quite sometime. Benedict was a temporary aberration.

    And you are correct, because of the personal charisma of papal infallibility, and the papalotry that seems to be the only faith that is central in the modernist Roman Catholic Church, and the destruction of the tradition, there will be nothing in the future from a Pope simply to arbitrarily declare for women's ordination.

    And since it is only submission to the Pope himself which now makes a Catholic, almost everyone will accept his decrees on this issue as The Catholic Faith.

    But, it will take much longer than the fifteen years you have mentioned. The complete destruction of the Tradition will now have been complete. Everything, from liturgy, to the ordination of women will now simply be a personal directive of the Pope; reference to tradition will be of no use, there is now no tradition.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'd like to think that this would lead to a huge and lasting schism, but I doubt that will happen. I mean if the present state of Roman Catholicism, which is pretty abysmal, is enough for some apologists to maintain their "we are the true church" claim then I hardly think so trivial a matter as women's ordination will stop them. What is it that holds Roman Catholics together in this monstrous polity? It can't just be the will of the pope? The whole thing just seems so tribal, superstitious, and bureaucratic. I mean the pope can have a Twitter account, and Roman Catholic priests can still perform exorcisms...

      Delete
    2. Once again, Patrick, you are correct. There might be a small schism, but it will be very small. At least one must respect some Anglo-Catholics, they did indeed leave over this issue, and this included many men with families to support, who tossed it all aside for the Faith. I sincerely doubt there will be any such movement against the ordination of women, good Lord, look at the pathetic reaction there was to the complete destruction of the 1500 year old Roman liturgical tradition...and even they are still trying to find a way to submit to the modernist Vatican.

      One of the things I find so trying with so-called Catholic traditionalists is that they cannot see that the Pope is one of the problems, and they also cannot fathom that most buttocks-in-the-pew novus ordo Catholics are quite happy with things just as they are and look forward to more changes.

      Delete
  2. On this point Dale I would beg to differ. I think on the current trajectory Rome will ordain women to the 'priesthood' sooner rather than later. But, as we well know, it all depends on the current CEO. I think this one is, despite his critics, too conservative to do so but with a 'liberal' successor anything is possible.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, you are correct, but I still think it will take longer than 15 years, but it is indeed true that this present Pope will be setting up a more liberal successor(s) who will indeed introduce, by personal fiat, the ordination of women. And as Vatican I explained and stated as dogma, the pronouncements of the Pope are irreformable and do not depend upon the consent of the Church.

      Delete
  3. I'm more amazed that female deaconesses are on the consideration table, but admitting married men to the priesthood is still anathama for some strange reason. It's as the RCC imagines a priest to look like a Ken doll when undressed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes indeed. Years ago when I first heard a R.C. nun broach the subject of women's ordination, her main reason was that since there are more women religious than male vocations to celibacy, the vocation crisis would be solved by ordaining nuns.

      When it was pointed out that perhaps the vocation's crisis could be solved by ordaining married men, as is done in the eastern rites, her response was that celibacy was a foundation of the charisma of the priesthood! (modernist Romans love the word charisma by the way, another word I simply do not understand).

      Delete
  4. I have recently read the article “Female Deacons in the Byzantine Church” by Valerie Karras. While defending the ordination of deaconesses, she does stress that: “female deacons did not have the public processional and other liturgical functions of male deacons. For example, the ordination rite […] does not provide for the deaconess to read petitions and explicitly prohibits her from distributing Communion during the Divine Liturgy, both of which were typical functions of the male deacon.” Chant is mentioned, but the Western Church already has choirs in the Hildegardian tradition.

    But knowing how any possible historical precedent tends to get subverted and abused in the Roman, this might indeed lead to a ahistorical liturgical function, or at least become a haven for wannabe-womanpriests.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Since the Roman Catholic Church laity, in both its eastern rite as well as western rite parishes, are already completely comfortable with women Eucharistic ministers and female servers, the psychological barriers have already been dismantled.

      Delete
    2. The fraud behind every contemporary movement to restore ancient practices or return to am earlier tradition is that invariably the data is manipulated until it becomes a data set leading to a preconceived conclusion. Noone really wants to have deaconesses as they originally may have been - the desire is for something that reflects a contemporary ideal of how they ought to be.

      Delete
    3. That ancient deaconesses were not deacons was plainly demonstrated by Martimort in his magistral Les diaconesses : essai historique (Rome: Edizioni Liturgiche, 1982). Their functions even varied a lot between places (Mesopotamia, where they first appeared in the III century, Byzantium, and the West), their ordination rites showed ostensible instability, and by the XI c. they had disappeared everywhere. But most people will ignore these facts and will remain attached to Vagaggini's ludicrous statement that deaconesses were actually deacons.

      Delete
  5. Although it is not practically relevant to me in my life, I confess that I have more than a few tinges of sorrow when I look at how much that man has changed things in the religion of my birth. I would not go so far as to say Roman Catholicism is perfect, but there was much worth cherishing despite myriad of misteps beginning at Vatican I. Whatever is left after this pontificate will be the skeleton of the tradition and, I would presume, unrecognizable from the traditional faith of the West.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pope Francis seems (seems, mind you) a conscientious man to me, who has simply inherited centuries of corruption, bad theology and a personal cult in which he sincerely believes. He might have a somewhat cavalier attitude to "tat," which his predecessor only brought out when he felt like it and then hardly consistently, but he certainly laps up the adulation of the crowds, and seems in the kind of "bullying" tradition of JPII. If Francis wants women deacons, of the contemporary kind of how they ought to be (as you say), then he will get them. His reasoning? "Do what I want, I'm the Pope!"

      Delete
    2. Of course, I would chant Psalm 137 as I remembered the church of my birth but I'm afraid any affection I might have had has been sucked dry. I tell you, when Old Mother Damnable lifts her skirts the stench is overpowering.

      Delete
  6. Traddies are so asinine that they believe if a Pope tried to do this he would be struck dead by God.

    Anthony

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You mean his head won't explode?

      Delete
    2. And if a pope does give the green light to girlie priestesses and his head does not explode will the heads of Traddies blow instead? That would be fun to see!

      Delete
    3. Actually Rubricarius, I for one, would rather enjoy watching.

      Delete
    4. The ironic thing is the traddies are the most ardent of Catholics is defending the Vactican I dogma of papal infallibility all the while calling the post VII popes heretics, blasphemers, destroyers of the Church, etc. You can't make this stuff up.

      Anthony

      Delete
  7. Many years ago, in the 70's, when I was a seminarian in Paris, there was a church that had an easternised novus ordo on Saturday evenings, the choir was fantastic and they had dropped in a bunch of litanies from the eastern liturgy, the cherubim hymn, Great Entrance etc. (such mixing of rites is quite popular amongst a certain sub-set of novus ordo types who like mystery, exotica, and incense). And although the mass was said facing the audience, there was a type of temporary ikonostasis with ikons of Christ and the BVM. The deacons, who did all the censing, in the Byzantine style, and chanted the litanies, standing in the normal Byzantine deacon place before the altar, with raised orion, carried the elements in the Great Procession, gave communion, actually all of the liturgical actions of Byzantine deacons, were all women.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dale,

      May I ask in what church did all this take place?

      Thank you

      Delete
    2. This happened in the early 1970's. I have long since forgotten the actual parish, sorry. I remember that a few of us from the Russian Orthodox seminary went because we had heard that the choir was fantastic. Needless to say, we were quite shocked and left. It was one of the ancient down-town churches.

      But at that time there was quite a bit of eastern game playing amongst the novus ordo crowd; ikons were very big as well as a sort of bizarre "eastern spirituality"; it was all simply odd. At the same time, real eastern rite Catholics were rather looked down upon.

      Several Orthodox clergy, such as the then deacon Stephen Hadley, from our Lady of Affliction Francophone Russian Orthodox parish, were very supportive of this sort of thing, actually thinking that if the west adopted the eastern rite, union would be possible. For many Orthodox, the only issues are liturgical, and such people were very supportive of the novus ordo and openly despised the old Roman rite and tradition. I fondly remember his wife saying about this group, that if they were going to adopt bits and pieces of the Byzantine tradition, at least they could dump them in in the correct places.

      Delete
    3. I've never seen this rite-mixing in full but know exactly what you mean, and have even met two or three ex-Catholic Orthodox who came from this school of thought. It always puzzled me; I found it hypocritical (Eastern traditions good; Western traditions bad). I chalk it up to exoticism; fashionable Western self-hatred, a.k.a. multiculturalism. White liberals adopting non-Western trappings to stick it to conservative whites, like the hippies adopting the trappings of India; real ethnics actually matter relatively little in that. (Yes, it is "cultural appropriation" and it's rude to the actual non-Western cultures.) So it was with that Byzantinizing game. "Greek good; Latin bad. Icons good; statues bad." Real Eastern Catholics were looked down on as embarrassing throwbacks to before Vatican II and thus ignored; easy to do since they're few in the West, but they were around to first show me a traditional Catholic Mass in person 30 years ago.

      And I can imagine the kind of Orthodox who went for this; you see a version of this online as the kind who seem ecumenical to us Catholics but really hate our Western guts as their own right wing (ROCOR, Mount Athos) does. So they team up with the Catholic liberals (now old) to belittle us traditionalists. As you say, this posture makes sense for them (promoting pseudo-Byzantinized Novus Ordo) since the reason they're not in the Catholic Church is they worship their culture (which is a good culture; don't get me wrong). Jesus said, "Teach all nations," etc., not "make everybody Byzantine Rite." I'm not called to their rite, and as you say, their Western Rite is a joke.

      Delete
    4. SS Gervais & Protais, perhaps - a church which I frequented when in Paris between 1981 and 1985. It was the church of a religious group called the "Communaute de Jerusalem."

      Delete
    5. Or maybe not, since I don't remember gals playing at deaconing there, which if there had been, my first visit would have been my last.

      Delete
  8. Man, the 70s were just weird. Can't explain it, You just had to live it

    ReplyDelete
  9. It's not going to happen for several reasons, and I'm not just saying that by faith because I'm "Roman." All the churchgoing advocates of women's ordination are old cranks. Young liberals don't go to church anymore.

    Suppose a heretical Pope or a faction in "the Roman Church" did try it. If a Pope, then the sedevacantist scenario will have come true. If a faction, it would end up another dead-end rump sect like the Old Catholics (who now ordain women). The Anglicans do it: do secular people flock to their churches and convert? Women's ordination is obviously not God's plan; it never was.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I thought most churches were dominated by "liberals." That seems to be the case round here.

      Women's ordination is a howling disaster. I said that in the latest post. What happens? Ordinary people, otherwise in good faith and genuine, take one look at them, listen to the crap they spout, and think that there's something wrong with them, and that their "vocation" is a ruse for some deep psychological need; to be crass for a moment, like lesbians, the self-evident desire to have a penis. These women are not godly at all; they're wicked.

      Delete
    2. And what's really funny is the secular liberals who slightly encourage women's ordination don't go to the churches that do it. They don't go to any church anymore. All women's ordination does is piss off the really religious.

      Delete
    3. I dunno John, this Pope seems to disprove many of you contentions about passing cranks. I do not think they are passing, I think perhaps they are now the norm. I think you realise that I do not say that with any sense of triumph, I think it very sad actually.

      The projectory seems to be on the same lines as the Church of England; except in the CofE one needed some sort of consensus, in Rome only the opinion of one matters now.

      Delete