Get a load of this…
It is stupefying to me that women cannot preach at Mass. The faithful during Mass, as well as the presiders, are missing out on the wisdom, experience and inspired reflections of half of its members. St. Mary Magdalene, pray for us.https://t.co/USedUvBxS1
— James Martin, SJ (@JamesMartinSJ) July 22, 2019
Oh, that’s stupefying, is it?
The Augustinians, the Benedictines, the Cistercians, the Dominicans, Franciscans, Carmelites, Trinitarians, Trappists, Basilians, and just about every major religious community founded admits men and women; that is, most of the major ones have men’s and women’s branches of the order or congregation.
Which one does not?
The Jesuits, who have resisted having “Jesuitesses” since the beginning – and the Institute of Mary (Mary Ward’s community) does not count.
St. Mary Magdalene pray for Jesuits.
Loading ...
It occurred to me years ago a woman could get away with preaching during Mass by writing a priest’s homilies for him.
St. Paul certainly did not find it stupefying. I’m glad to see LifeSite make the reference. They are becoming invaluable in my estimation.
What a bunch of whiny women. These women are making the Mass about themselves rather than the sacrifice of Christ or worshipping God. Did you read the comments? One woman, a convert, left her parish because it offered too much Adoration. Apparently, Christ has been reduced to a knickknack.
Jesus, take Jesuits!
James Martin SJ forgets that priests have read St. Catherine of Siena, St. Teresa of Avila, St. Therese of Lisieux, St. Hildegard, Servant of God Sr. Lucia of Fatima…
Deo volente, this is not what he has in mind:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=YaDQ1vIuvZI
It’s more stupefying that this goofball has been able to get away with the filth he has been preaching these many years. Anathema.
But Mary kept all these words, pondering them in her heart.
Maria autem conservabat omnia verba haec, conferens in corde suo.
An inconsistent liberal? No…….
Roman Catholic consecrated women religious had a substantial portion of the Church in the palm of their hand for at least a century given their role in Catholic education.
The vast majority jumped ship much to our detriment and their shame.
Women can assume a role in the evangelization of the world once again, but will their contribution be any more than an imitation of Jesuit aberrance? In most cases it would appear unlikely. As for men, are they even interested at all?
So in other words St. John Paul II was “stupefying” when he determined infallibly that the Church does not have the authority to ordain women as priests?
As a convert one of the first things I had accepted was to enter the Church on it’s terms, not mine. If James Martin does is not willing to accept the Church “as is” then he really wants a different religion other than Catholicism.
Modernists don’t really care about the equality of women. They hate priesthood and want to empty it of its very nature. If it was about giving women a voice, they’d lament the cataclysmic collapse of women’s religious life. Who had more influence than the nuns who taught and formed millions of Catholic boys and girls for centuries? But then they abandoned their charisms in the name of female empowerment and forfeited their actual power.
Instead of returning to sanity and fidelity they want to destroy priesthood, too. The priest offers sacrifice to remedy SIN. The priest absolves from SIN. And so the priest must need preach about SIN. Jim Martin and Co. deny sin fundamentally, so they must annihilate priesthood and corrupt preaching, making everyone their own governor. It’s a demonic subversion of the triple munera.
They’ll lose, because they oppose Christ. And that’s not a fight they can ever win.
Sick burn, Father!
I have no doubt though, the Jesuits will be the first to admit women and NOT as a separate congregation. They’ll be the Boy/Girl Scouts of religious orders.
A great line from the article:
“Of the 13 lay preachers in our parish, 12 were women.”
So apparently their lay men are fine with accepting their place in the pews. Or else that is the most henpecked group of men… Can you imagine being married to a woman who insisted on preaching at mass? Imagine how much preaching she does at home…
I had no idea that was the case. What the heck, Jesuits?
I’ve heard plenty of effeminate “presiders” at Mass deliver plenty of effeminate homilies, but concede that these presiders ostensibly were men.
OK, I’ll bite.
Since Fr. Martin criticizes his Church for its treatment of women, and Fr. Z has beautifully demonstrated the state of women in the Jesuit arena, a wag might say:
“Why doesn’t Fr. Martin go back and help fix the totally broken and infested place from which he comes in the Jesuit Order? Then he can come back and show the rest of the Church how it is done. The Jesuits need your help badly, you can’t help them fast enough…”
Martin is just the American mouthpiece of the German Bishops. This is a coordinated media blitz which is supposed to soften the ground ahead of the Amazoniacs Synod:
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/exclusive-speakers-at-vatican-run-youth-meeting-call-for-womens-ordination-lgbt-inclusion
https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/cardinal-marx-proposes-men-and-women-preach-at-mass
https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/german-bishops-website-floats-idea-of-women-giving-homilies-at-mass
Allegedly, there was one woman member of the Jesuits — Joanna of Austria. (The one who was the daughter of Emperor Charles V and Empress Isabel of Portugal.)
St. Francis Borgia let her take the oath, but she appeared on the official rolls under a pseudonym, Mateo Sanchez. Or so the story goes.
Since she couldn’t participate in religious life as a Jesuit, she ended up founding a convent of Discalced Poor Clares and entering it herself.
But anyway, St. Ignatius was pretty big on not letting women start up female orders of Jesuits, because the vocation was supposed to be rigorous, and there wasn’t any reason for women religious to copy the odder bits of Jesuit charisms. There have been a lot of women who have supported Jesuit spirituality and done things like teach Jesuit practices, but there’s still no Jesuit order of women.
So basically, Jesuits are more obedient to St. Ignatius Loyola on this subject than on all the rest! Funny!
I forgot to remind folks that the Church has had women preach in the public square, as opposed to Mass or in church. St. Catherine of Siena and St. Rose of Viterbo are good examples (both from tertiary orders, too), and both acted to evangelize people who were supposed to be Catholic, but had grown lukewarm.
And somehow, most of these people who want women preachers are totally uninterested in what the historical women preachers taught or stood for. Because they stood for Christ and the Church, and for reviving orthodox belief.
Suburban banshee,
I don’t buy the Jesuit life as a reason for not having a women’s branch. The Dominicans are preachers (Ordo Praedicatorum) , yet from their beginning they have had houses of nuns leading strictly contemplative lives, similarly to the Carmelites. The same is true for missionary work, done by the fathers but not the nuns. The point is that there is nothing in the lives of Jesuit fathers that would have precluded establishing houses of contemplative Jesuit nuns.
I think a good argument
Suburbanbanshee says
anyway, St. Ignatius was pretty big on not letting women start up female orders of Jesuits, because the vocation was supposed to be rigorous . .
Your last word, coupled with Francis’ frequent diatribes against rigorists. perhaps sheds some light on contemporary Jesuit confusion
It is maddening that this man can continue on with impunity! He leads souls astray. Cannot anyone reign him in?
Pingback: A National Review response to stupefied @JamesMartinSJ | Fr. Z's Blog
Katherine: Good one. That wag has a good point.