A reader sent me the following story
“Is the candidate worthy?” intoned Bishop Patricia Fresen ceremonially, as lifelong Catholic Juanita Cordero stood before her in a pure white gown, about to be ordained as a priest. The question was asked three times during the ordination ceremony on Sunday, July 22, as one female priest and two female deacons were invested with the power to perform sacraments?—?a function forbidden to women under canon law. They are part of a movement from within the Roman Catholic Church that has been ordaining female priests since 2002, though those involved say that the tradition of women priests and bishops dates as far back as Mary Magdalene, whom they consider an apostle of Jesus. The participants in this movement fervently hope to be embraced by the Vatican, as other splinter groups have been before them.
Sunday’s ordination, witnessed by more than 100 invited guests, took place at an interfaith center in Santa Barbara that reporters agreed not to name in exchange for an invitation to attend. (Reporters also agreed not to print the names or orders of the nuns in attendance.)
I always found this partial secretiveness on those supporting women’s ordination to be quite the opposite of what they say. No doubt you will get an ear full of how they are being prophetic, etc. Funny I don’t recall the prophets that were afraid to speak up and face the consequences of their actions. If they truly believe they are following the will of the Holy Spirit then for these supporters to want to hide their affirmation of the Holy Spirit’s will to reporters is rather odd. From their perspective wouldn’t this be like the actions of Peter in the courtyard? "Women’s ordination is the will of Christ, but don’t quote me on that or indicate my name or anything about me."
…The women ordained Sunday join 18 others in North America who belong to an international organization called Roman Catholic Women Priests, which counts among its number approximately 50 female priests and deacons worldwide, including a few whose identities remain undisclosed in an effort to protect their jobs within the church. Also secret are the identities of the male bishops who ordained Bishop Fresen. Film and documentary evidence of that ceremony is being kept by a notary public, not to be released until the deaths of the male bishops.
Oh the bravery! It reminds you of the martyrs who gave their life rather than to go deny any aspect of Church teaching. Oh I forgot, the new martyrs are celebrated for denying any aspect of Church teaching.
At least two additional Santa Barbara women are studying to be ordained, perhaps as early as next year. Besides their gender deviating from the Catholic priest norm, neither of the two deacons ordained Sunday — who are scheduled for re-ordination as priests on July 28— is celibate. Norma Coon, of San Diego, has been married for 40 years. Toni Tortorilla, of Portland, lives with her lesbian partner. Cordero, a newly anointed priest who lives in San Luis Obispo, is a former nun who has been married for 30 years to a former Jesuit priest.
What you mean besides women’s ordination they have other issues with Church teaching? This of course is always the way it is. They are never totally orthodox with women’s ordination being the one and oly exception. It is always a slew of things and it is up to them to help push back the gates of Hell that must have opened and prevailed against the Church until they came along.
The ceremony, which took place on the feast day of Mary Magdalene, also differed from the standard Catholic ordination in the names the presiding clergy used for God, who is ordinarily referred to as “the Father.” The female priests instead referred to “Mother and Father” and to “God/de.” (The latter is pronounced like “God,” with the silent, extra letters hinting at a goddess that those in the ceremony declined to refer to explicitly.) Jesus Christ retained his masculine identity, however.
I thought it was pronounced "gaudy" and in the stoles they weary. Poor Mary Magdalene she suffers so much abuse now of days.
The reason that the women are determined to remain Roman Catholics, instead of forming their own church or joining another—such as the Episcopal Church, which ordains female clergy—is that they consider the Roman Catholic Church to be their family, albeit a dysfunctional one, and they have no intention of abandoning it.
Now if only they would realize that they are thr dysfunctional part of the family. This is rather interesting since Mark Shea wrote on Monday the philosophical divide between some converts and some cradle Catholics as seeing the Church as family.
There is another aspect of women’s ordination that is just so un-Catholic. If as a Catholic you really believe that the Church is in error on something than you would act as the reformer saints did. Foremost it would be prayer by these advocates for the Church. There is just no history of reform by disobedience in the Church. Saint reformers were often persecuted for calling their religious orders back to their charisms and the Gospel. Yet when their superiors and bishops had them disciplined or gave them orders they were obedient to them, even when it was unfair. It was their heroic sanctity and obedience to the Church that would lead to true reforms. Just as lack of humility and disobedience is the easiest way to sort out false seers, the same criteria can be easily applied to the false reformers.
“The meaningfulness of the Catholic tradition to me is the long history of mysticism in the church,” said priest Victoria Rue, who also teaches theology and theater at San Jose State University. She finds particular inspiration in the women mystics of the Middle Ages. “Priesthood,” added Rue, “is about leadership within the community.” There are many types of ministries to which people are called, she said, concluding, “I feel called to the ministry of the liturgy,” which she described as communal worship.
Well Victoria Rue is much better at theater than theology and theater is exactly right for the playacting of these pseudo ordinations. This is the world where "I feel called" is suppose to trump the Church. Not even all men who feel called to the priesthood are, and it is the bishop who makes the final decisions as to who become seminarians and ultimately who he accepts as having a vocation to the priesthood. Strangely vocation is one of those words I never see in these articles.
This article also doesn’t even pretend to have a shred of journalistic integrity. It is totally one sided on the question of women’s ordination with not even the feigned balance some articles on women’s ordination have.
They added that excommunication, contrary to popular belief, does not remove one from the church; it only means that one cannot receive the sacraments. “Nothing can put you out of the church once you have been baptized,” said Fresen. However, after the first seven women priests ordained on the Danube in 2002 were promptly excommunicated, none of the other ordained females has been excommunicated.
That the groups of women trying to simulate a sacrament since 2002 have not been formally excommunicated seems to be true. Canonist Ed Peters Excommunication Blotter doesn’t list any excommunication due to women’s ordination since 2002, though this is based on information in the public record. Considering that Cardinal Mahony is their Bishop I would be skeptical as to it happening in their case. The only people he seeks to discipline are nuns that criticize him on TV. I would love to be wrong here.
Viewed as a magic act, the present paradigm-shattering stunt is a disappointment. It’s one thing to watch a conjurer pull a rabbit out of a hat, another to watch him pull a hat-lining out of a hat. So here we see three perfectly conventional Unitarians kneel down, the secret formula is intoned over their heads, and — presto! — when they get to their feet we find three perfectly conventional Unitarians. None of the parties starts off close enough to Catholic churchmanship to make the ceremony a plausible counterfeit, whence it’s hard to see why they bother in the first place.
Are any of those women named Helena Handcart?
“The participants in this movement fervently hope to be embraced by the Vatican, as other splinter groups have been before them.” — article
Not a chance. The Vatican has reaffirmed, RECENTLY, that they do not have the *authority* to ordain women to Holy Orders.
The anonymity is awful. Do they think they are doing anything for the dignity of women, here? If they remain anonymous many of us, women included, will develop a fear of women in churches, just as we flinch and retreat from all snakes unless we can identify them as non-poisonous by their markings. It has already begun in me. When a woman speaks publicly about Catholic doctrine, I am jumpy til the end, waiting to be slapped with a lie. That reaction began when the goofy 6 (?) got “ordained” in a boat.
” There is just no history of reform by disobedience in the Church.” I think that’s a great rule of thumb. Especially if you consider that the world was redeemed by the obedience of Jesus. And Jesus was brought into the world by the obedience of Mary.
Then there’s Martin Luther. He acted in an understandably human way, but his disobedience did not bring about reform. Obedient orders suffered to bring about reform. Clearly, God works wonders through obedience.
Any bets on the Bishops? Could Roger Mahoney have done this? It would be an act of Charity for someone to divulge this.
I’m not surpised that we haven’t heard about them being excommunicated – it’s hard excommunicate someone when you don’t know who it is that you are supposed to be excommunicating. It’s easy to be “brave” and to go where no man (or woman) has gone before when you’re hiding.
To the poster who said that this is making him leary of any woman who speaks publically of Catholic doctrine. Let’s not forget that you can fall into a ditch on either side of the road.
I think this was done in a Catholic Church.
Why else do they need to hide the location, even though there are Stations of the Cross? And why do they need to hide the names of participants (the nuns)?
The hope, apparently, is that they can affiliate with some sort of organization that contacts other catholics unofficially. In that way they feel they might be able to influence enough people toward their cause to soften the ability of the Vatican to say no.
Don’t laugh. Things similar to this have been done before and in the late 20th century this sort of strategy was working for some groups(unfortunately).
I suspect in the new paradigm (non-modernist, truth-based) this won’t be near as successful. However there are many, many catholics still living in the old mid-20th century paradigm.
And what’s most shocking about all this is something that appears to be portrayed as sort of a side issue–that the first ordinations were performed by actual Catholic bishops in good standing–which I doubt.
I believe, in fact, that those so-called “ordinations” were performed by old rite catholic bishops not in union with Rome. This is the *real* reason for the secrecy.
I sincerely doubt old rite Catholics would be responsible for such an act though I can see why you would suspect a group that plays just as fast and loose with concepts of obedience to Ecclesial authority.
I could easily imagine old rite Catholics breaking canon law to punish, or even wrongly accuse a possible offender, but not actively taking part in their ordination.
It would be like Destro cooperating with Mary Kate and Ashley Olsen. Sure they are all pure evil, but each in their own special way.
I think it would be great to dress in drag and try to get secretly “ordained” as a sign of protest against women’s ordination being only for women.
Gee, what else we “ordain” as a sign of protest? Dolphins perhaps? An extremely busy box-turtle?
Even the Pope couldn’t ordain a woman as a Catholic priest any more than he could consecrate Oreos and milk into the Body and Blood of Christ.
A woman is invalid matter for the sacrament of Holy Orders.
Yes, but not everyone knows that you cannot validly ordain a woman as a priest. Most people think that the Church is just a bunch of bigoted men who want to keep power.
That’s what makes this whole thing dangerous and sad. Had this happened prior to the catechetical demise of the 60’s it would have been strangled in its cradle.
Unfortunately, this is only the beginning.
That was me and I’m a woman, so it’s certainly worse for me to flinch when women teach the faith!! Being, so far, somewhat rational, I recognize my reaction as ridiculous and can counteract it by asking reasonable questions, etc. But what about men and women who won’t necessarily reconsider their reactions? I’m not the only Catholic in the nation who has become reactive to women w/ teaching authority in the Church after noticing a pattern of feminist language and spiritual untrustworthiness, surely.
I have to point out this portion: “of the male bishops who ordained Bishop Fresen”. Fresen USED to say that it was just one bishop, whom she wouldn’t name because he was in good standing within the Church. Now it’s more than one? Gee, this smells like…. a lie.
Frankly, it’s also sounding a lot like the neo-Gnostics who try to highjack Jesus into some avatar-like nonhuman. Not to mention, they’re forming a secret society. So maybe they need to leave the Church and attempt to join the Freemasons.
Comments are closed.