Nine 'women clerics' defy Vatican

[emad]

Nine Roman Catholic women have been unofficially ordained as priests and deacons in North America, risking excommunication by the Vatican.

The ceremony took place aboard a tour boat near Canada's capital, Ottawa.

The women - seven Americans, a Canadian and a German - were ordained by three female bishops, who were also unofficially anointed in 2003.

Seven women who were ordained in 2002 despite the Vatican's ban on female priests were later excommunicated.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4717277.stm

[SpiralHawk]

1. Eeeek! Stop them before they Threaten the Male Power Structure

They must be condemned, villified, excommunicated and humiliated.

For daring to stand up for basic justice.

Where is Pope Ratziner to Defend the Faith (of the Patriarchs)?

[Ravenseye]

2. Ok here's what I don't get

Please someone explain it to me.

If these women want to be priests and bishops. Hey, more power to them...but why stay in the catholic church? I mean...I understand wanting to change your religion from the inside etc...but if you disagree with some of the big tenets of the religion, then maybe it's time to make a new one?

Luther did it. Sort of. John Calvin, Henry XIII, that mormon guy.

Why not just have a schism...the Reformed Catholic church or something, where you follow everything else but just allow women priests, or whatever else you want.

Why stay in the church if your'e going to totally go against it?

[Tesha]

3. Why stay in the Democratic Party if they haven't supported our views? (NT)

[Ravenseye]

5. I don't understand

Maybe I'm slow today, I'm under the weather...

Why should Catholics stay in the Democratic Party if they haven't supported all liberal positions?

I'd say they should because the Democratic Party is much closer to the core of the Christian ideal than the Republican Party is. Just because you don't agree on every single issue doesn't mean that abortion takes precidence over every other single christian ideal like caring for the poor, the hungry, the sick, etc.

To be a Republican does none of these things, and they've coopted the catholics by screaming abortion in their faces.

[Bridget Burke]

9. I believe the reply you responded to meant....

"Why should a Democrat who don't believe the party reflects 100% of his or her beliefs stay in the party." Obviously to me--the Republicans are worse.

However, I understand your initial statement. If the women just want to engage in Performance Art, good for them. If they want to "be priests"--aren't the Episcopalians hiring?

[Ravenseye]

10. Ah

Yeah well, my response to that would be that the Democratic Party isn't a dogmatic institution like the Catholic church. The Democrats aren't going around saying "You must be pro-choice, pro-union, blah, blah, blah talking point, talking point, or you're not a Democrat and we won't accept your votes or money." It's a diverse group which has some common goals, but not all, etc. The Catholic Church is a dogmatic religion which says "you must believe in x,y,z or you are not a Catholic". That's the big difference.

Why remain a democrat if you don't agree with it 100%? Because it's a political party and you have to understand that there is no dogmatic truth in politics. Why remain a catholic when what you want is much more easily defined as Episcopalian, or Methodist, etc? I don't know.

[hedgehog]

13. Because we are still Catholics

We may disagree vigorously with the current hierarchy, but we're just as Catholic as the men in the hierarchy, maybe more so. Why should we leave when they are the ones who are wrong?

[Ravenseye]

14. Aren't they the ones in charge?

I guess that's the part I don't get. A person will say, "I disagree with what the Church hierarchy says, but i'm still a Catholic." Doesn't the Church hierarchy dictate what a catholic should do for ritual, and believe in?

What if the church hierarchy said something extreme like "No black people can be catholic" What black person in their right mind would fight to remain part of that church?

Maybe if there was only one church and your options are Catholiscm or shit out of luck I can see sticking around, but there are plenty of religions which are very close in most aspects. If you don't like the heirarchy and what they say, then what distinguishes that from say Episcopals?

Maybe there are other differences, but I just don't get someone who says "Hey I'm a gay woman and I want to marry my partner, but also be a Catholic priest." Gay? Kudos. Marry your partner? Congrats. Be a Catholic Priest? Huh?

[hedgehog]

20. See, now you are making the same mistake as some members of the hierarchy.

It's been a debate for some time. Is the wisdom to discern the true teachings of the Church invested in all the members or is it confined to the hierarchy? IN some centuries, the bishops and priest were chosen by the laity, in others, as no, the hierarchy chooses its membership. You are mistaking, again as do many members of the hierarchy, the changeable outer surface for the unchangeable core. What's happening now is that many in the laity are reasserting our right to determine what Church teaching should be.

[Ravenseye]

23. I still don't get it

So you want the people to reassert their right to determine what Church teaching should be, but by doing things like saying "hey i'm a Catholic priest" when you're a woman...won't they just excommunicate you and then you're not part of the church at all?

How does the laity assert itself without being excommunicated or otherwise removed from the church?

[Joe for Clark]

24. Because change comes in little doses

They might excommunicate these ladies.

But then, should not they equally the "war supporters", the Death penalty believers, or the "birth control" users??

I think they would have to excommunicate 99% of the United States.

Change comes from those strong enough to show their beliefs and demonstrate them.

And I still believe in the Jesuits teachings,

Joe

[hedgehog]

29. Think of it as belonging to a big family

Maybe in some families, the one who controls the family wealth controls the family, but that's pretty rare these days.Would you let your snooty great aunt throw you out because you marry the wrong person? How can the Vatican excommunicate people if everyone ignores the order? The only control left in the US is that in theory the bishops own all church property. A priest in Rochester NY was thrown out of his parish and the bulk of his parish followed him to a new site. The Vatican isn't happy and leans on the bishop to do something, but people are listening to their consciences, not the bishop.

[Orsino]

26. No more so than *'s Executive Orders...

...define what it is to be American.

I understand the impulse to reform. Martin Luther started something.

[FiveGoodMen]

15. If another political party came along

which represented my views better than the Democrats -- AND if they had a chance of winning elections -- I'd switch in a heartbeat. I would not say, "But I'm still a Democrat."

[existentialist]

34. Well if you are thinking . . .

like a protestant?

[lumpy]

19. Good question

I've known so many Catholics who disagree and disobey the Vatican edicts but they still cling on. Some have said that they are afraid of the wrath of God if they don't stick with the Church. They don't realize that a Christian doesn't have to be a member of a 'church' to be a 'good' Christian. If you know, believe and follow the Word, your place in your heaven is assured.

[Rich Hunt]

28. nope

They stay with it because Catholicism is closely aligned with ethnicity, especially in the US. They therefore have strong cultural ties to the church. Given the US ruling class' history of demanding assimilation to certain strains of Protestantism, those who remain Catholics are merely defending their identity and their heritage, as threatened groups do, and as their detractors well know, much as they pretend otherwise.


It must be "Catholic News Day" again on DU.

[SemperEadem]

30. There needs to be a break from Rome

The Catholic church in North America needs to establish its own entity, the American Catholic Church, and split from Rome. Rome has outlived its usefulness--it is a church that has been surprised by time.

And that's Henry VIII, not 13th. He's the 8th and last King named Henry in England.

The difference between Luther, Calvin and Tudor is that Tudor established the English Catholic Church, not the Protestant Church. In fact, he burned Protestants at the stake, too, just like his daughter, Mary I Tudor--only he burned slightly less than she did. His son, Edward VI is the one who ushered in Genevan Protestantism (Calvin) into England.

Luther was going for reform within the Roman Catholic Church--his saving grace was that the German princes agreed that $$$ should not be flowing out of the German states and into the Vatican Banks.

[fricasseed_gourmet_rat]

31. I would be ALL FOR a Reformed Church.

I was raised Catholic, and there are so many aspects of the denomination that I love:

-the tenet that respect and dignity toward others (not just blind faith) is the truly Christ-like lifestyle
-the opposition to the death penalty
-the aversion to the "megachurch" phenomenon
-the willingness to go into Third World countries and GENUINELY MAKE THINGS BETTER rather than just try to proselytize
-the populist and extremely progressive Catholic Worker movement during the Depression

...why did things have to get so bad?

There are some Catholics (*coughs* SCALIA *coughs*) who are just poisoning the establishment, particularly in the United States. If there was enough of a movement to start a Reformed church that would have more progressive views of homosexuality, the roles of women, and contraception*, I'd be all for it.

*Note that I do not have a problem with the Church being pro-life. I think it's completely appropriate to Catholic doctrine. What I do have a problem with is when they try to inject it into politics.

[Emendator]

35. Because

The vast majority of people who disagree with the Church over certain things will never leave, would never even consider leaving the Church. They may disagree with it, but they still love it. Even most lapsed Catholics don't ever totally cut themselves off and usually come back. Any shismatic movement would eventually fail because it would have no moral authority. So they will continue to complain and will continue to be ignored.

[emad]

4. And another headache for the Vatican:

Rare Scrolls Reveal Early Biblical Writing
By Jennifer Viegas, Discovery News


July 22, 2005— Three ancient scrolls — one parchment and two silver — recently have been identified as containing some of the world's earliest known verses from the Hebrew Bible, also known as the Old Testament.

The discovery of two fragments of a 2,000-year-old parchment scroll in the Judean Desert was announced last week by Israeli archaeologist Chanan Eshel of Tel Aviv's Bar Ilan University.

The fragments contain verses from Leviticus, the third book of the Hebrew Bible, attributed to the tribe of Levi from which Israeli priests are said to be descended. The book consists of regulations for both the priests and their followers.

The two silver scrolls were found by Bar Ilan archaeologist Gabriel Barkay in 1979 in a cave at Ketef Hinnom near Jerusalem. It was only until recently, however, that technology made it possible for scientists to read the scrolls, which date to the 7th century B.C. and likely were worn around the neck as protective amulets.

http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20050718/bible.htm...

[Ravenseye]

6. Link Didn't Work (nt)

[emad]

8. Try:

http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20050718/bible.html

[Bridget Burke]

7. How interesting.

However, this find did not indicate any "headache" for the Vatican. Perhaps that will appear in the rest of the article, when a functioning link is available.

Edited to add: Thanks for the repaired link. Archaeology is one of my interests. Still, I don't see why this particular find should be a problem for the Vatican.

[emad]

11. The last time I interviewed Prof Geza Vermes, translator and

publisher of the Dead Sea Scrolls he said that the biggest furore at the Vatican concerning the Scrolls was the transcripts of the Gospel of Mary as well as references to female disciples of John the Baptist.

In the documentary I made about the Scrolls he went on record to state that he had had a very volatile reaction from Vatican hierarchy on anything connected to references of a female ministry among early Christians. And that this ranged from cajoling him not to publish anything connected to such themes, to threats, bribes and even financial inducements to stop any mention of women's involvement in the early days of the Church.

He said that Cardinal Kung had been his most vociferous critic and had warned him that the Catholic Church stood by its tradition of relentlessly opposing the validation of any archaeological findings that suggested a female ministry had flourished alongside that of the male.

[MountainLaurel]

27. Fascinating stuff!

Can you provide any sources for further reading?: I'm building my own personal library on women's spirituality and this sort of thing is very interesting to me.

[damntexdem]

12. Oh, just appoint one pope, and then she ...

can excommunicate Benny.

[DanCa]

16. You go girls !

And as someone who has been officially excommunicated it's not that terrible. My response is kind of like the smug smile Gandalf the Grey gave Frodo Baggins in Lord of the Rings, the Fellowship of the Ring. When Frodo said "You have officialy been declared a disturber of the peace."

[SemperEadem]

32. Excommunication is meaningless

[Emendator]

36. Tolkien

was a staunch Catholic who would want these women excommunicated.

[DanCa]

37. Tolkien

Was a man of great understanding and compassion who had dwarves, men, and elves getting along. I am sure that he wouldn't delight in another person's spiritual suffering. Welcome to DU.

[Emendator]

39. Thanks

I'm not saying he'd delight in their spiritual suffering. But he'd support their excommunication.

Nice to meet you too.

[DanCa]

41. Tolkien

But we have to take into cosideration he's coming from a time when the church didnt have all these hot button social issues. I am not prejudging him or you but it was a different world back then. And any one who loves Tolkien is my friend. Were cool right? :) :)

[Emendator]

42. Sure

No problem. I don't think the world was that different. There were still ethical dilemmas and stupid leaders back then. Only the specifics change. Imagine how much better the 20th century had been if they had listened to Benedict XV and put an end to WWI. I fear Benedict XVI will be similarly ignored when the time comes. Ironically, I'm not that big a Tolkien fan. I never read the LOTR books, though I loved the movies. He gets the heroic cycle down perfectly. As does Babylon 5, which will always be my favorite.

[no_to_war_economy]

17. take that Vatican!

[LisaM]

18. It was the church that changed

they used to allow women priests AND married priests.

I find it analagous to saying people should stop being Americans because they don't like a certain administration.

[lumpy]

21. I understand those old time Popes sure

had a ball, married or not. You can still be an American whether you have faith in the US or not. Being a member of a church is more like belonging to a club, for many people a social statement, a source of ego comfort and power.

[Joe for Clark]

22. Good for them!!

That is how change starts---in little battles.

I do believe it was the Jesuits from our own Notre Dame University that said female priests were inevitable. They also said something of a great comfort to the rest of us catholics that you love your fellow man, truly. That everything else is just a bug on the windshield of humanity.

I do like the Jesuits.

And for the record, I don't believe too many catholics (from the US)really believe EVERY edit coming from the Vatican--especially conservatives. Otherwise, please explain to me how it is that one could support this immoral war (against our Vatican) or the death penalty.

I also doubt strongly that too many really believe in the edit against birth control (putting it mildly). In fact I do NOT believe there very many Catholics that can even reconcile all the Vatican pronouncements. But we are still catholic---because we do believe as the Jesuits teach.

Joe

[July_July]

25. Huh?!

I can only assume that you are talking about The University of Notre Dame (what is this "Notre Dame University?"), a school run by the Order of the Holy Cross...in no way related to the Jesuits.

As a Domer, I take offense to such comments. Jesuits! bah!

[fricasseed_gourmet_rat]

33. The Jesuits are wonderful.

Just look at Jesuit universities like Georgetown and Boston College -- they're fabulous, and not just because they field great sports teams. Catholic universities have done a laudable job of emphasizing diversity of race, background, and creed. I went to an all-girls' Catholic high school run by the Sisters of the Sacred Heart (sometimes referred to as a female version of the Jesuits), and not only did our health classes discuss birth control, but we also had to pass the "survey of world religions" class before we graduated.

(And I think you mean "edict," not "edit.)

[DanCa]

38. welcome to DU Joe

Always glad to have another Clark fan onboard.

[Canuckistanian]

40. Yoiks! Who let THEM out of the kitchen?

This... just... won't ... do!

[Canuckistanian]

43. My wife left the church for this reason

Growing up, she never understood why she was taught and looked after by nuns but nuns never conducted church services.

The last straw for her was a collection for poor, downtrodden men who had fallen on poor financial times. When she dared to ask "what about he poor women?", she was brushed aside with a comment saying something to the effect that women were 'responsible for their own misfortunes', a clear message that women who were "immoral" (read: sluts) deserved no attention from the church.

Ever since, she has been totally turned off christianity, let alone the Catholic variety.