Scalia on wymymprysts. Make popcorn!

There was another fake women’s ordination the other day.  Elizabeth Scalia has excellent comments.

Context: A granny from  Long Island went through a fake ordination.  She babbled to someone in the the press, who lapped it up with gusto.

This is amazing writing, by the way.  Enjoy this sample!

Her disingenuousness also seeps through the page, like the second person of a fabulist trinity, beginning with the notion that she can willfully separate herself from the church due to a principled disagreement, but should still be able to proclaim from its ambo. And then, per NewsdayShe called herself “a faithful daughter of the Church…” without caring (or perhaps without realizing) that one cannot claim to be faithful in a relationship while stepping out from it, or breaking trust with it. This woman has done both. She can no longer say she is “faithful.” Nor can she claim “obedience”, which is one of the anchors of the Catholic priesthood — so heavy it helps to keep the entire church well-grounded.

Finally, this woman is offensive in her thoughtlessness. To drag her priest and his canonical duties into her passion-play was gratuitous and unnecessary; it’s of-a-piece with her self-involvement, though. She was thoughtless to the pastor and priest who served her — I am sure very faithfully — the whole time she was collecting the theology degree that seems, to some women, to be all one needs to be ordained a priest (as though the credential proves the calling).

Fr. Z kudos to Elizabeth.  Great writing.  Read the rest over there.

You know my take on the faux wymyn rites, and they concern ecumenism.  Every time some protestant sect hosts one of these goat rodeos, there should be a swift and stern response from bishops concerning that sect’s disrespect for our sacred rites and all ecumenical dialogue with them should be suspended.

 

Technorati Tags: , , ,

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Fr. Z KUDOS, Liberals and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Scalia on wymymprysts. Make popcorn!

  1. Clinton says:

    Elizabeth Scalia is spot-on with her observations on Ms. Lorello’s narcissism.

    My understanding of the Church’s views on priestly vocation is that, while a candidate may
    believe he has a calling to the priesthood, it is the Church’s right and Her duty to determine
    and confirm that vocation. I suppose it’s like a marriage in that both parties concerned
    must be free to agree to enter into the relationship.

    Those women who claim to be priestesses have attempted to take by force what the Church
    has determined She is unable to give. They demand, She declines. It might be stretching the
    analogy a bit, but these women’s insistence that the Church gratify their wishes against Her
    will holds the selfishness one sees in an attempted rape.

  2. frjim4321 says:

    It’s probably not a surprise to anyone here that my hope is that the theoretical obstacles to an inclusive ordination policy will some day be overcome. That being said, I’ve met and worked with some women who were very committed to inclusive ordination, one of them in fact was recently ordained a deacon. In all honesty, I wouldn’t want to work with any of them again. Too stuck on a narrow personal agenda to ever get any real work done. Staff meetings constantly sabotaged with various causes and pet issues. Which is not to say that I have not worked with many high-functioning women and men in ministry. It’s just my limited experience that the half dozen or so who were gung-ho about inclusive ordination weren’t otherwise very productive in ministry.

  3. Athelstan says:

    Aw, you poor dear! Not being allowed to proclaim scripture for the Catholic church, after bending over like Miley Cyrus to shove your sacred feminine into its face and sticking out your tongue.

    Ouch. That’s gonna leave a mark.

    But she’s right. There’s a bountiful surplus of narcissism on display here.

  4. Matt R says:

    “It’s probably not a surprise to anyone here that my hope is that the theoretical obstacles to an inclusive ordination policy will some day be overcome.”
    Fr. Jim, there are no theoretical obstacles, in the sense that it is not subject to revision as further interpretations are given. Holy Mother the Church-as you should know- has no authority to ordain females. If she did, females would have been the first sacred ministers. More specifically, the Blessed Mother would have been ordained.
    BTW, it’s freaky that the lady crossed her stole, as visible in the photo accompanying the original article.

  5. frjim4321 says:

    Hi, Matt … I hear you but personally I have not found the arguments holding that the church does not have the authority to ordain females very convincing. That being said, I don’t fret night and day about it, and I go about my work unfettered by bitterness or disappointment. Similarly the argument that Mary or other females would have been ordained in First Century Palestine dismisses to readily the cultural position of women in that exceedingly patriarchal society. Thus the argument that Jesus of Nazareth did not ordained females and therefore we don’t have the authority holds no water with me. More than anything else ordination is predicated on baptism and we certainly have not disputed that women can be baptized.

    I don’t get what you are saying about the crossed stole?

  6. frjim4321 says:

    t0 = too

  7. Kathleen10 says:

    And therein lies the problem.

    Fr. Z. “goat rodeo”. It is sublime.

  8. benedetta says:

    It’s not really an “argument” at all, Fr. Jim. And, the Church doesn’t need for you or anyone to “be convinced”. Our intellects are gifts from God, but we shouldn’t make idols of our own personal abilities to comprehend. We don’t need endless undermining and second guessing. What is needed is trust.

  9. “personally I have not found the arguments holding that the church does not have the authority to ordain females very convincing.”

    But, of course, an infallibly proclaimed papal definition requires no argument that convinces. Assent of will suffices for the faithful. So, indeed, neither you nor I nor anyone else need worry about it. Not any more.

  10. frjim4321 says:

    Glad that works for you, Henry.

  11. benedetta says:

    Elizabeth Scalia’s piece is excellent. It points out the sad state of affairs in which people demand this or that from Holy Mother Church, while simultaneously attacking her, a reflection of our American narcissistic entitlement culture. The idea of going all Protestant on the Church and then still expecting to hold a place of ministry in a parish is really au courant for our times. Does she not care a whit for the people of that parish? Clearly, in this day and age, if people want what Protestant denominations have to offer, there is absolutely nothing stopping them…by the same token, if they remain Catholic, they expect Catholicism. Though very vocal, the ones who think they are entitled to remain amidst the communion of the Faith while vocally scorning her teachings are really not gaining any ground. By the way, anyone hear how the Sr Joan teleconference of last Wednesday went?? Has the envelope been delivered yet?

  12. Matt R says:

    Fr. Jim, I echo Henry Edwards.
    As to the crossed stole, it’s the traditional way that a simple priest wears his stole. IIRC a bishop in the traditional form wears it hanging down straight (like all priests do today). I am not sure why a female “priest” would do something so traditional…they can’t even be bothered to faithfully observe the rubrics and text of the second edition of the Pauline Missal.

  13. Traductora says:

    I most definitely think Fr Z is right in his suggested response to the Protestant churches that sponsor these faux ordinations. I have never understood why there is never even a mild rebuke or expression of regret from the local Church authorities. The participation of Protestant churches (although in my neck of the woods, most of the “churches” doing this are Unitarian gatherings) is offensive, and I can’t help but think that it’s meant to be so.

  14. Matt R says:

    Traductora, Cardinal Burke ended the charitable projects run in conjunction with a Reformed synagogue that hosted an “ordination,” and they were warned that this would happen. I can’t speak to whether Protestant churches hosted any during his time in St. Louis (or even La Crosse), then he would have done the same thing, I think.

  15. BLB Oregon says:

    “Every time some protestant sect hosts one of these goat rodeos, there should be a swift and stern response from bishops concerning that sect’s disrespect for our sacred rites and all ecumenical dialogue with them should be suspended.”

    When a local church did this, Archbishop Vlazny pointed out that he had made no statement about the ceremony when he got news of it because it had happened in someone else’s church and was not a Roman Catholic ceremony. This changed when the local paper published a story in which it was described in just that way. “My main purpose in speaking up now is to assure you that there was no ordination of a Roman Catholic priest at Zion United Church of Christ in Gresham on July 28. Even though Catholics were involved, the claim that it was a Catholic ceremony is wrong but, hopefully, not intentionally disrespectful of a sacrament which we Catholics regard as a precious treasure, one for which we are called to exercise reverent and faithful stewardship. … Our relationships with other churches are sometimes fragile because of differences in beliefs and values. But in all ecumenical relationships Christian churches do their best to respect the diversity in practices and beliefs. I regret the apparent disregard for this understanding.”

    His point (which he made more explicitly elsewhere in his piece) was that when Catholics attempt to ordain a woman, by that act they leave the Church. It is sad, but having so unequivocally walked away, the Archbishop gives them the treatment of another denomination at that point. IOW: he leaves them alone until they start falsely reporting in public that they belong to his diocese. At that point, it is his duty to protect the Church and the sacraments by very loudly speaking the truth about these false ceremonies and how false it is that they produce any Catholic priests.