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.
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...
ReplyDeleteOn 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.
ReplyDeleteI'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.
ReplyDeleteI 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.
ReplyDeleteBut 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.
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.
DeleteThat 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.
DeleteAlthough 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.
ReplyDeletePope 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!"
DeleteOf 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.
DeleteTraddies are so asinine that they believe if a Pope tried to do this he would be struck dead by God.
ReplyDeleteAnthony
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!
DeleteThe 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.
DeleteAnthony
Dale,
ReplyDeleteMay I ask in what church did all this take place?
Thank you
Man, the 70s were just weird. Can't explain it, You just had to live it
ReplyDeleteIt'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.
ReplyDeleteSuppose 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.
I thought most churches were dominated by "liberals." That seems to be the case round here.
DeleteWomen'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.
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.
DeleteI'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.
ReplyDeleteAnd 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.
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."
ReplyDeleteOr 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.
ReplyDelete