This is great!
One of the perks of being on the road and having a semi-vacation from reading the interwebs and posting a lot is that I haven’t seen the National Schismatic Reporter very often. Today, however, something from Fishwrappy NSR came across my radar screen and nearly made me laugh out loud.
Fishwrap has a columnist whom we have seen before, Jamie Manson. She outdid herself this time. You can always count on her. She was the first over there to confirm my prediction that the catholic Left will turn on Pope Francis.
Now this. As usual it takes Jamie forever to get to her point, but eventually she slogs up to it, sometimes with readers in tow:
A step forward for married men is a giant step backward for women
Earlier this month, yet another stunning headline came out of the Vatican.
“Pope says married men could be ordained — if world’s bishops agree,” read The Tablet of London. [I wonder if that was written by The Tablet's former Rome guy, Robert Mickens.]
But this latest news did not come directly from the mouth of Pope Francis. [Of course it didn't] The message was relayed by Bishop Erwin Kräutler of the Xingu diocese in the Brazilian rainforest. [Yah... and therefore it is reliable. Right?] In an interview with the Salzburger Nachrichten, Kräutler, an Austrian-born priest who has served as bishop of Xingu since 1981, said Francis showed openness to ordaining married men, or viri probati.
Kräutler claimed that during a private audience with Francis, “the Pope explained that he could not take everything in hand personally from Rome. We local bishops, who are best acquainted with the needs of our faithful, should be corajudos, that is ‘courageous’ in Spanish, and make concrete suggestions.”
The term viri probati comes from the Latin “viri,” meaning “men,” and “probati,” meaning “proven” or “tested.” And though the phrase has circulated within the church since the first century, the exact nature of the test that will prove these men worthy of the priesthood has yet to be formally developed or articulated.
[Here we go!] As we begin to imagine who might be welcomed into this widened priesthood, it is important to remain realistic about the kind of men the church will seek. “Viri probati” will very likely be married men who have exhibited a strict adherence to official church teaching. [Get that? In bizarro-Fishwrap world there is "official" teaching and there is the, according to them, real, authentic spirit-inspired teaching which basically reflects there own notions and appetites. "Official" is bad, by the way.]
And if that is the case, what will this mean for the men who left the priesthood but continued to exercise their priestly ministry through small house churches or intentional communities? [Nothing. But note the use of "house churches", as if they were in any way legitimate. This seeks to use imagery from the ancient Church to legitimize chaos, heresy, etc.] Since they continued to perform what the institutional church views as “valid but not licit” eucharistic celebrations, will they qualify as “proven” men? [Unlikely.] What about former priests who have associated with [Wait for it!] organizations that advocate for women’s ordination, same-sex marriage or the use of contraceptives? Could they ever be welcomed back into the fold? [Jamie's projects of special interest.]
Is it possible that the hierarchy could disqualify a former priest simply because, decades ago, he willingly chose to break his promises to the church in order to marry the woman he loved? Will church leaders prefer instead to start with a “clean slate” of men who either are already ordained deacons or who have not previously been ordained? Those men might be seen as coming to the priesthood with less baggage for vocations directors to examine. [Sounds pretty grim, no?]
The most important question that arises out of the debate over the viri probati, of course, is how it will affect the ongoing struggle for the genuine equality of women in the Roman Catholic church. [We do not, of course, accept her twisted premise. Women are equal in the Church now.]
The admittance of married men into the priesthood could present a serious impediment to those who seek the full inclusion of women in church leadership. Why? Because lifting the ban on married male clergy could serve a dual purpose: It would take the edge off the priest shortage while recruiting married men who fully support the ban on women priests. [How this must gripe them! the Left dearly yearns for cracks in the structure, but there may be other ... consequences for there agenda that they don't like!]
Pope Francis has been clear in his belief about traditional gender roles, particularly the idea that women, by the nature of God’s design, are not entitled to equal authority in the church. [The language here is both whiny and manipulative.]
If you can stand it, read the rest there. It is a workshop in Left-think.
The Left is in a hard spot. They are all “Rah! Rah!” for Francis now. Wait a while longer. When he starts to affirm things they want overturned, they will turn on him.