When it comes to priestettes, one man's "barrier" is another man's law

MSNBC has the scoop—"discovery"!—of the week: although the Catholic Church doesn't ordain women, a "small but fervent group of women is determined to change all that." (In related news, the Berlin Wall recently fell and Larry Bird just retired.) The video features a graphic with the wording: "Women Priests: Breaking Barriers in the Catholic Church." But one of the priestettes, Elizabeth Jane Via, who works for the district attorney's office in San Diego (and who is described in the report as a "law and order kinda person), says, "I accept and understand that I am violating the law of the Roman Catholic Church." Because, you see, people who violate the laws of San Diego should be prosecuted and go to jail, while people who violate the laws of the Catholic Church are heroines, MSM stars, and women of great faith.

But faith in what? Via states, "I believe the law [allowing only certain men to be ordained] is unjust." So she believes in her authority over against the authority of the Church. Not surprisingly, she immediately falls back on the false dichotomy used by such dissenters: "What I like to say is that the Church has already changed. It's the Vatican that's behind." Ooooh, the nasty Vatican. Wrong answer, girlfriend; besides, it merely makes you sound like a hyper-liberal Protestant. What you really mean is that the Magisterium is wrong and you are right, which requires a severing of authority from communion, which in turn, if taken to its logical conclusion, radically redefines the meaning and nature of "Church" and finally dissolves the validity of both the papacy and apostolic succession. And yet Via and Co. claim their ordinations are "legitimate" because they were carried out by a couple of (unknown) Catholic bishops. (Insert your own wisecrack here about "Via media," if you desire.)

Well, we've been here before, courtesy of NBC News. as I noted less than a month ago:

Again, applying simple logic, the priestette's view of the Catholic Church must be a variation of these perspectives: 1) the Church is a man-made institution that must change with the times, or 2) the Church is an institution founded by Christ but under the control of men who hold beliefs contrary to those of Christ. In the first case, the most logical thing to do, as a radical feminist-type, is to simply attack and destroy the Catholic Church. And, of course, there are many feminists and their supporters who do just that; they, I think, are far more logical than women such as Zeman, who seem to operate in a fuzzy, confused world of nostalgia intermingled with feminist politics.

In the second case, it seems absolutely nonsensical to be working to be ordained and given offiical recognition by the very men who represent and defend the very thing you detest and oppose. Again, it seems more logical to simply scrap the entire thing and say, "Hey, we are the true Church! We don't need the Catholic Church!" If the bishops suddenly stated, "Whoops! Our mistake! We just realized that women can and should be ordained!", it would still mean that priestettes would be ordained and recognized by the very authority they detest as patriarchical and male-dominated. It would also mean (to repeat what I've already said) that infallible teaching can be fallible, which means the Catholic Church is a complete farce. And who, really, wants to be ordained and given props by a farcical Church (yes, yes, I know—waaaay too many people)?

And, again, there is the mantra, "My conscience in paramount." Been there, done that. Put aside Ruether and Daly and learn some actual Catholic theology already.

Why does this rankle me so? Part of it is simply the brazen illogic, self-obsessive bloviation, and disdainful dissent so readily evident in the priestette movement. Their theology is lousy. Their ecclesiology is incoherent. But there is also the fact that these women, in seeking to "empower" women and pursue "justice," are (unwittingly or not) attacking authentic femininity and making a mockery of not just the priesthood, but of the unique nature of women, especially as embodied by the Blessed Mother.

The 1976 CDF document, Inter Insigniores, stated, "Women who express a desire for the ministerial priesthood are doubtless motivated by the desire to serve Christ and the Church." Perhaps; I'm not so sure. God alone will judge their motivation, but isn't it striking how so many of these women don't seem interested at all in Christ and have only criticism for the Church (or, as noted above, make an artificial, convenient division in the Church so they can appear to be pro-Church while bashing Church authority). Inter Insigniores further stated:

And it is not surprising that, at a time when they are becoming more aware of the discriminations to which they have been subject, they should desire the ministerial priesthood itself. But it must not be forgotten that the priesthood does not form part of the rights of the individual, but stems from the economy of the mystery of Christ and the Church. The priestly office cannot become the goal of social advancement; no merely human progress of society or of the individual can of itself give access to it: it is of another order.

It therefore remains for us to meditate more deeply on the nature of the real equality of the baptized which is one of the great affirmations of Christianity: equality is in no way identity, for the Church is a differentiated body, in which each individual has his or her role. The roles are distinct, and must not be confused; they do not favour the superiority of some vis-a-vis the others, nor do they provide an excuse for jealousy; the only better gift, which can and must be desired, is love (cf. 1 Cor 12-13). The greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven are not the ministers but the saints.

The Church desires that Christian women should become fully aware of the greatness of their mission: today their role is of capital importance, both for the renewal and humanization of society and for the rediscovery by believers of the true face of the Church.

The Theotokos is the greatest of her Son's disciples. She was not ordained, nor did she seek to be ordained, and yet she is the greatest of the Saints. Why? Because instead of saying, "My will be done," she said, "Thy will be done." Because instead of chasing after power and self-fulfillment, she praised God: "My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior." And because instead of pursuing position, she embraced the Passion. Instead of obsessing about gender, she gloried in the Gospel. Instead of attacking the Body, she became the Mother of the Body.

Related IgnatiusInsight.com Articles and Excerpts:

• Women and the Priesthood: A Theological Reflection | Jean Galot, S.J. | From Theology of the Priesthood
• The Real Reason for the Vocation Crisis | Rev. Michael P. Orsi
• Pray the Harvest Master Sends Laborors | Rev. Anthony Zimmerman
• Priestly Vocations in America: A Look At the Numbers | Jeff Ziegler
• Clerical Celibacy: Concept and Method | Alfons Maria Cardinal Stickler | From The Case for Clerical Celibacy
• The Religion of Jesus | Blessed Columba Marmion | From Christ, The Ideal of the Priest
• The Priest as Man, Husband, and Father | Fr. John Cihak

Comments

[Jeff Miller]

By the press' logic there are also several popes because there are people around the world who feel they were called to be pope and were validly elected.

[Ed Peters]

CO wrote: "Why does this rankle me so? Part of it is simply the brazen illogic, self-obsessive bloviation, and disdainful dissent so readily evident in the priestette movement. Their theology is lousy. Their ecclesiology is incoherent."

Pretty good reasons, those.

[Dan]

I have not read a great deal about the issue of ordination of women, but it occurred to me recently that if the Church were to ordain women it would thereby implicitly condemn Jesus as a sexist. Jesus after all had many women as followers and friends, and yet made none of them apostles.

I do not find credible the claim that a Catholic woman can be called to be a priest rather than a sister. The claim of such a call suggests not only disobedience but also a confusion of the sexes. It also is hard to understand or sympathize with a claimed call that is strictly limited to a form of service that the Church does not recognize, particularly when so many legitimate forms of service exist. The Church through her history has been capacious enough to give berth to the spirituality of a wide variety of great women saints. There is no need to distort the priesthood for women to serve. As some have noted, Mary is higher than Peter.

I am also struck by the fact that the prevalence of women claiming to be called to be priests dates back to roughly the time that Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem started publishing books. This suggests to me that the call originates from modern feminism rather than from God.

[Todd]

It can be helpful to confine ourselves to what the Church teaches. It might be said that the name-calling and insults go beyond the Christian approach.

"I am also struck by the fact that the prevalence of women claiming to be called to be priests dates back to roughly the time that Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem started publishing books."

Saint Therese Lisieux. She started it.

[Skyhawk]

"Saint Therese Lisieux. She started it."

Are you sure it wasn't Mary Magdalene?

What a bunch of hooey Todd...

[Ed S]

I really hope, Todd, that your last comment was an attempt to be funny. Definitely, don't quit your day-job.

There's a world of difference between St Therese expressing her deep love of Christ-- saying she desired to be a priest, an apostle, or a martyr for Him--and the priestettes belligerently defying Tradition and the Magisterium to satisfy their ill-conceived and selfish needs.

The allusion to St Therese's quote about wanting to be a priest is out of context here.

[Ed Peters]

The contempt for law, as a human endeavor, that is being shown by the lawyer Via is breathtaking.

[joanne]

"Saint Therese Lisieux. She started it."
That's obnoxious and insulting.
St Therese loved the priesthood because she so loved Jesus. She did not, and did not wish to, defy God's holy will. She merely yearned to do all that she could, according to His will, to serve (and BE) Love. Think of a child who, out of love and awe, wants to be everything her father is, no matter that her desires are unrealistic.
She wanted to DIE for Jesus, the Eternal Priest. She wanted Him to be loved and obeyed by all. She wanted to be a missionary, spreading the Gospel all over the world, gathering in the souls Jesus died for. These were the desires of her heart, not an arrogant resume of self-worth.
Women demanding to be ordained detest priests and the Church (this is evident by their actions and their words). How then, do they expect to serve the Church? They have no interest in God's will, but are caught up in serving their own interests.
I am reminded to pray for the humility, obedience, and love we need in order to be recognizable as belonging to the Church.

[Ed Peters]

Maybe it's me, but I thought Todd's quip was joke. Assuming it was, it does illustrate that humor in comboxes is very tricky thing. So much goes into humor (tone of voice, context, gesture, etc) that can't make it into a blog post. Attempts at humor typically fail in cyberspace. imho.

Of course, maybe Tood really meant it. In which case, dot dot dot.

[joanne]

Todd, sorry if you were kidding. Ever since Thomas Aquinas was used to promote "choice" I've been touchy. Also, St Therese is the patroness of my parish, so I'm touchy x2.
There are definitely "Catholics" waving Mary Magdalen around as their reason for promoting a female takeover of the priesthood.
Maybe when Catholics become Catholic again I'll regain my sense of humor. Mea culpa.