Monday, July 31, 2006
1) All the articles about these Catholic women who decided to ordain themselves priests seem to frame women priests as an inevitability within the Catholic priesthood. We get this type of language:
"We need to claim for women their equal right with men to be ordained. And we need to do this 'contra legem,' to break an unjust law and yet to remain firmly within the church," Patricia Fresen said last year at a Philadelphia conference on women in the church.But they fail to note that at least one of the participants is married, and wouldn't be able to be a priest if she were a man:
Houk decided to pursue priesthood after listening to a speech by Fresen. Houk said she realizes she will face rejection for her choice, but she said she's prepared for that.Now I know personally of no absolute reason why a women shouldn't be a minister, and there are plenty of congregations who ordain them. If that's what she wants to do, then why not convert to one of those congregations? But what's going on here is obviously not this "equal rights for women" thing, because they appear to believe they have special rights. And who has a "right" to be a priest, anyway?
"I do not intend to start a church of my own," said Houk, a 66-year-old, married mother of six and grandmother of five. "I will not lead people away from the Catholic church but rather I hope to lead people to the church."
And another thing - it was after women started to be ordained as ministers within the Episcopalian church that it drove right off the rails. I predict that the next generation of Catholics are going to be a lot more conservative in their opinions. I laughed in the early 80's when Episcopalian women started holding conferences and talking about the "godess Sophia". But I cried when the diocese of Pennsylvania had "alternate liturgies" posted on its website that were clearly Wiccan in 2004, and conflicted ministers who could not decide whether they wanted to be Druids or Episcopalians most in 2005. And I wasn't even surprised when the Episcopalian conference refused a resolution suggesting the road to salvation lay through Jesus this year. They're now quite proud to claim that they cannot offer a "definitive road to salvation". A continuous line of Popes had expressed that exact same view, so now at least they have, in a way, reconciled to the Roman Catholic church.
Once you start making up all the rules all over again, things get rough quickly. Patricia Fresen has many more issues with the Catholic church than just women in the priesthood, and she has a habit of making decisions without consulting others. It all seems vaguely familiar to me, and my guess is it will end in the same way, because they're already talking about the "patriarchy". Abortion will be something of a sacrament, Mary will be an example of patriarchal abuse of a woman who hasn't had her consciousness properly raised, and no one will be rude enough to speak about sins other than the offensive sin of talking about sin, 'cause that's really not inclusive at all.
2) In the meantime, the French are banning public nudity on beaches, and cute, squeezable Michael Moore claims he's besieged by Republicans wanting to hug him. Blame it on the dog days of summer?
France is banning nudity on public beaches,huh?
So where could I possibly go to see a Catholic priestess sunbathing "au naturel"?
(The AB on watch has his head in the radar hood and the 2nd Mate is busy at the chart table waiting to plot a new course.
And there's some sort of fistfight down in the mess over the big binoculars).
Somehow, this does not seem natural.
I don't know Bilgeman. Perhaps we could get them to protest for their natural rights to go au naturelle.
Links to this post: